DUKE 

UNIVERSITY 


LIBRARY 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/woodrowwilsonsca01wils 


Copyright  by  Harris  & Ewing 


WOODROW  WILSON’S 
CASE  FOR  THE  LEAGUE 
OF  NATIONS 

Compiled  with  his  approval 
By 

HAMILTON  FOLEY 


£ 


0.5  4-55 

PRINCETON 

PRINCETON  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LONDON:  HUMPHREY  MILFORD 
OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 


MCMXXIII 


Copyrighted  1923 
By  Hamilton  Foley 


PRINTED  AT  THE  PRINCETON  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

Princeton  Neav  Jersey,  United  States  of  America 


3-  - 

9 


ns  7 £ 


TO  FRANCES 


CONTENTS 


FOREWORD  Xlll 

CHAPTER  I.  THE  WORLD  WAR  I 

CHAPTER  II.  THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES  2 5 

CHAPTER  III.  THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS  57 

CHAPTER  IV.  AMERICA  AND  WORLD 

PROBLEMS  I49 

appendices: 

A.  THE  ADDRESS  OPENING  THE  DISCUSSION  AS  TO 

A LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS  211 

B.  THE  ADDRESS  EXPLAINING  THE  COVENANT  220 

C.  PRESIDENT  WILSON’S  ADVISERS  234 

D.  THE  CABLEGRAMS  FROM  TAFT  AND  ROOT  238 

E.  INTERPRETATION  OF  ARTICLE  X 249 

F.  THE  COVENANT  OF  THE  LEAGUE  2$d 


A letter from  Woodrow  Wilson 


* 


2340  S STREET  N W 


WOODROW  WILSON 

WASHINGTON  D C 


26th  April  1923 

My  dear  Hr.  Foley, 

1 congratulate  you  upon  the 
completion  of  a difficult  piece  of  work,  and  1 
confidently  hope  that  the  hook  will  he  of  service 
to  all  who  wish  to  understand  the  League  of  Nations 
and  the  vital  Issues  which  arise  out  of  the  attitude 
of  the  United  States  towards  the  League. 

As  I have  written  you  before,  I could  not 
consent  to  have  the  hook  appear  as  my  own,  hut 
if  you  will  publish  it  with  a frank  statement 
on  the  title  page  of  what  it  is  and  how  it  was 
made,  it  will  have  my  entire  approval. 


Mr.  Hamilton  Foley, 
Pittsburg,  Penna. 


THIS  BOOK 


. a frank  statement  ...  of  what 
it  is  and  how  it  was  made.” 

This  is  a compilation  of  President  Wilson’s 
official  and  detailed  explanation  of  the  League 
of  Nations  Covenant  and  of  the  Treaty  of 
Versailles,  made  to  the  Foreign  Relations 
Committee  of  the  Senate,  and  to  the  people  of 
the  United  States,  when  the  Treaty  was  be- 
fore the  Senate  in  1919. 

To  this  has  been  appended,  in  full,  the  Cov- 
enant  and  two  Addresses  he  delivered  before 
the  Peace  Conference  at  PariiTXJne  in  which 
he  made  it  clear  the  United  States  had  no  in- 
tention of  entering  the  politics  of  Europe  and 
was  concerned  primarily  for  the  peace  of  the 
world.  The  other  in  which  he  explained  the 
Covenant  of  the  existing  League  of  Nations.- 

His  explanation  to  the  Senators,  was  given 
at  a Conference  with  them,  at  the  White 
House,  TrT August  1919.  His  explanation  to 
the  people,  was  given  in  some  thirty-seven 
Addresses  delivered  during  his  tour  of  the 
Western  States  in  the  month  of  September 
following. 

From  the  stenographic  minutes  of  that 
White  House  Conference  and  from  the  official 
record  of  all  of  those  Addresses  to  the  public, 


W 


I have  taken  sentences  pertaining  to  each  sec- 
tion of  the  Treaty  and  of  the  League,  to 
World  Problems  and  to  World  Peace,  of 
which  he  made  mention,  and  so  combined 
them  that  within  the  pages  of  this  book  may 
be  found  President  Wilson’s  personal,  com- 
prehensive and  detailed  explanation  of  all 
phases  of  the  questions  he  put  before  the  peo- 
ple in  all  of  his  Addresses;  and,  so  far  as  cir- 
cumstances permitted,  in  his  Conference  with 
the  Members  of  the  Senate  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations. 

Every  word  in  this  book  is  Mr.  Wilson’s 
own  word,  and  all  are  here  used  in  explanation 
of  that  detail  of  the  subject  in  which  he  used 
them. 

> Explaining  the  Treaty  of  Versailles,  Presi- 
dent Wilson  spoke  with  the  full  knowledge 
and  authority  that  came  to  him  as  the  War 
President  of  this  country;  as  the  official 
spokesman,  by  their  request,  for  the  Allied 
and  Associated  Powers  in  the  pre-Armistice 
negotiations  with  the  Central  Powers,  and  as 
one  of  the  four  or  five  Members  of  the  Peace 
Conference  that  had  it  within  their  power  to 

, influence  in  the  greatest  degree  the  policies  of 
the  peace. 

Explaining  the  League  of  Nations,  Presi- 
dent Wilson  spoke  with  the  knowledge  and 
authority  that  came  to  him  as  Chairman  of 


the  Commission  on  the  League  of  Nations  o 
"the  Peace  Conference.  As  Chairman  of  that 
Commission,  President  Wilson  was  the  first 
to  present  and  explain  the  existing  Covenant 
to  the  representatives  of  all  the  Nations  of  the 
world  at  the  Paris  Peace  Conference.  As 
Chairman  of  that  Commission,  he  gave  the 
Peace  Conference,  as  a whole,  the  first  official 
knowledge  of  the  way  its  purposes  and  poli- 
cies for  permanent  world  peace  had  been 
written  into  the  Covenant. 

After  hearing  President-Wilson’s  explana- 
tion of  the  attitude  of  the  United_States 
toward  a League  of  Nations,  and  his  explana- 
tion of  the  Covenant  of  the  existing  League, 
all  the  Nations  at  the  Paris  Peace  Conference 
unanimously,  adopted  the  Covenant  as  it  now 
exists.  Assured  and  convmced7~tKese  other 
countries  have  since  joined  the  League:  Al- 
J)ania^ Argentine  Republic,  Austria,  Bulgaria, 
Chile,  Colombia,  Costa  Rica,  Denmark,  Es- 
thonia,  Finland,  Hungary,  Latvia,  Lithuania, 
Luxemburg,  Netherlands,  Norway,  ^Para- 
guay, Persia,  Salvador,  Spain,  Sweden,  Swit- 
zerland, Venezuela. 

These  facts  make  these  explanations  of 
Woodrow  Wilson  as  to  the  League  of  Nations, 
a part  of  the  Diplomatic  and  War  History  of 
all  the  Nations  of  the  world. 


While  Mr.  Wilson  has  generously  given  this 
compilation  his  entire  approval,  I wish  to  as- 
sume, personally,  all  the  responsibility  for  any 
possible  error  in  quotation  that  may  have 
passed  unnoticed  and  without  intention.  My 
one  thought  and  purpose  has  been  to  make 
available  the  complete  and  authoritative  ex- 
planation of  the  League  of  Nations,  and  all 
that  it  means  for  the  peace  of  the  world,  made 
by  the  President  of  the  United  States  who 
presided  at  the  formation  of  the  Covenant 
of  the  League,  and  whose  explanation  of  it  has 
been  officially  accepted  by  practically  every 
Government  in  the  world. 

Hamilton  Foley 

Pittsburgh , Pa . 


WOODROW  WILSON’S 
CASE  FOR  THE  LEAGUE 


OF  NATIONS 


THE  WORLD  WAR 


npHE  people  of  the  United  States  have  not 
-®-  been  informed  of  the  real  character  and 
scope  andcontentsof  the  greatTreatyof  peace 
with  Germany,  which  we  shall  always  know 
as  the  Treaty  of  Versailles.  The  people  of  the 
United  States  have  been  singularly  and  I 
sometimes  fear  deliberately,  misled  as  to  the 
Treaty  of  peace.  In  the  greater  part  of  the 
United  States  the  people  do  not  know  what  is 
in  the  Treaty. 

They  have  been  directed  to  certain  points 
in  the  Treaty  which  are  incidental  and  not 
centfalrTheir  attention  has  been  drawn  away 
fromTthe  real  meaning  of  this  great  document, 
and  I think  I cannot  do  you  a better  service, 
or  the  peace  of  the  world  a better  service,  than 
by  pointing  out  to  you  just  what  this  Treaty 
contains  and  what  it  seeks  to  do,  because  we 
are  now  as  a Nation  to  make  what  I cannot 
help  characterizing  as  the  most  critical  de- 
cision we  have  ever  made  in  the  history  of 
America. 

In  order  to  check  the  falsehoods  that  have 
clustered  around  this  great  subject  I want  to 
tell  you  a few  very  simple  things  about  the 
Treaty  and  the  Covenant. 

[ i 1 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

We  sent  our  boys  across  the  sea  to  defeat 
the  purpose  of  Germany,  but  we  engaged  that 
after  we  had  defeated  the  purposes  of  Germany 
we  would  complete  what  they  had  begun  and 
effect  such  arrangements  of  international  con- 
cert as  would  make  it  impossible  for  any  such 
attempt  ever  to  be  made  again.  The  question 
therefore  is,  “Shall  we  see  it  through  or  shall 
we  now  at  this  most  critical  juncture  of  the 
whole  transaction  turn  away  from  our  associ- 
ates in  the  war  and  decline  to  complete  and 
fulfill  our  sacred  promise  to  mankind.” 

I want,  if  you  will  be  patient  with  me,  to 
set  the  stage  for  the  Treaty,  to  let  you  see  just 
what  it  was  that  was  meant  to  be  accom- 
plished and  just  what  it  was  that  was  accom- 
plished. 

Perhaps  I can  illustrate  better  by  recalling 
some  history. 

Something  over  a hundred  years  ago  the  last 
so-called  peace  conference  sat  at  Vienna, — 
back  in  the  far  year  1815,  if  I remember  cor- 
rectly. It  was  made  up,  as  the  recent  confer- 
ence in  Paris  was,  of  the  leading  statesmen  of 
Europe.  America  was  not  then  drawn  into 
that  general  family  and  was  not  represented 
at  that  conference,  and  practically  every  gov- 
ernment represented  at  that  time,  except  the 
Government  of  Great  Britain,  was  a govern- 
ment like  the  recent  Government  ofGermany, 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

where  a small  coterie  of  autocrats  were  able  to 
determine  the  fortunes  of  their  people  without 
consulting  them,  were  able  to  use  their  people 
as  puppets  and  pawns  in  the  game  of  ambition 
which  was  being  played  all  over  the  stage  in 
Europe. 

But  just  before  that  conference  there  had 
been  many  signs  that  there  was  a breaking  up 
of  that  old  order,  there  had  been  some  omi- 
nous signs  indeed.  It  was  not  then  so  long  ago, 
though  there  were  but  three  million  people 
subject  to  the  Crown  of  Great  Britain  in  Amer- 
ica, they  had  thrown  off  allegiance  to  that 
Crown  successfully  and  defied  the  power  of 
the  British  Empire  on  the  ground  that  nobody 
at  a distance  had  a right  to  govern  them 
whom  they  did  not  choose  to  be  their  govern- 
ment; founding  their  government  upon  the 
principle  that  all  just  government  rests  upon 
the  consent  of  the  governed.  And  there  had 
followed,  as  you  remember,  that  whirlwind  of 
passion  that  we  know  as  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, when  all  the  foundations  of  French  Gov- 
ernment not  only,  but  of  French  society,  had 
been  shaken  and  disturbed — a great  rebellion 
of  a great  suffering  population  against  an  in- 
tolerable authority  that  had  laid  all  the  taxes 
on  the  poor  and  none  of  them  on  the  rich,  that 
had  used  the  people  as  servants,  that  had 
made  the  boys  and  men  of  France  play  upon 

[3] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

the  battle  field  as  if  they  were  chessmen  upon 
a board.  France  revolted  and  then  the  spirit 
spread,  and  the  conference  at  Vienna  was  in- 
tended to  check  the  revolutionary  spirit  of  the 
time.  These  men  met  in  order  to  concert  meth- 
ods by  which  they  could  make  monarchs  and 
monarchies  safe,  not  only  in  Europe  but 
throughout  the  world. 

The  British  representatives  at  that  confer- 
ence were  alarmed  because  they  heard  it  whis- 
pered that  European  governments,  European 
monarchies,  particularly  those  of  the  center  of 
Europe,  those  of  Austria  and  Germany — for 
Austria  was  then  stronger  than  Germany — 
were  purposing  to  extend  their  power  to  the 
Western  hemisphere,  to  the  Americas,  and  the 
prime  minister  of  Great  Britain  suggested  to 
Mr.  Rush,  the  minister  of  the  United  States 
at  the  Court  of  Great  Britain,  that  he  put  it 
in  the  ear  of  Mr.  Monroe  who  was  then  Presi- 
dent, that  this  thing  was  afoot  and  that  it 
might  be  profitable  to  say  something  about  it. 
Thereupon,  Mr.  Monroe  uttered  his  famous 
Monroe  Doctrine,  saying  that  European 
power  that  sought  either  to  colonize  this  West- 
ern Hemisphere  or  to  interfere  with  its  political 
institutions,  or  to  extend  monarchial  institu- 
tions to  it,  would  be  regarded  as  having  done 
an  unfriendly  act  to  the  United  States,  and 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

since  then  no  power  has  dared  interfere  with 
the  self-determination  of  the  Americas. 

That  is  the  famous  Monroe  Doctrine.  We 
love  it  because  it  was  the  first  effective  dam 
built  up  against  the  tide  of  autocratic  power. 
The  men  who  constituted  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  while  they  thought  they  were  building 
of  adamant  were  building  of  cardboard.  What 
they  threw  up  looked  like  battlements  but  pre- 
sently were  blown  down  by  the  very  breath  of 
insurgent  people,  for  all  over  Europe  during 
the  middle  of  the  last  century  there  spread, 
spread  irresistibly,  the  spirit  of  revolution. 
Government  after  government  was  changed  in 
its  character.  People  said,  “It  is  not  only  in 
America  that  men  want  to  govern  themselves, 
it  is  notonly  in  France  that  men  mean  to  throw 
off  thisintolerableyoke.  Allmen  areof  thesame 
temper  and  of  the  same  make  and  of  the  same 
rights.”  So  the  tide  of  revolution  could  not  be 
stopped  by  the  conclusions  of  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  until  it  came  about  that  there  was 
only  one  stronghold  left  for  that  sort  of  power, 
and  that  was  at  Berlin. 

In  the  year  1914  that  power  sought  to  make 
reconquest  of  Europe  and  the  world.  It  was 
nothing  less  than  the  re-assertion  of  that  old, 
ugly  thing  which  the  hearts  of  men  every- 
where always  revolt  against — the  claim  of  a 
few  men  to  determine  the  fortunes  of  all  men, 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

the  ambition  of  little  groups  of  rulers  to  domi- 
nate the  world,  the  plots  and  intrigues  of  mili- 
tary staffs  and  men  who  did  not  confide  in 
their  fellow  citizens  what  it  was  that  was  their 
ultimate  purpose.  Up  to  the  time  of  this  war, 
it  was  the  firm  and  fixed  conviction  of  the 
statesmen  in  Europe  that  the  greater  nations 
ought  to  dominate  and  guide  and  determine 
the  destiny  of  the  weaker  nations,  and  the 
American  principle  was  rejected.  The  Ameri- 
can principle  is  that,  just  as  the  weak  man 
\ has  the  same  legal  rights  that  the  strong  man 
I ' has,  just  as  the  poor  man  has  the  same  rights 


* 


■'as  the  rich,  though  I am  sorry  to  say  he  does 


"X  AO  J J 

/ A not  always  get  them,  so  as  between  nations  the 


'/ 


prindplA^fl-^qualitv  is^  the  only  principle  of 
justice,  and  the  weak  nations  have  iust  as 
many  rights  and  just  thesame  rights  as  the 


nations. 

I want  to  recall  to  you  the  circumstances  of 
the  war  and  the  purposes  for  which  our  men 
spent  their  lives  on  the  other  side  of  the  sea. 
That  war  did  not  just  happen.  There  was  not 
some  sudden  occasion  which  brought  on  a 
conflagration.  On  the  contrary  Germany  had 
been  preparing  for  that  war  for  generations. 
Germany  had  been  preparing  every  resource, 
perfecting  every  skill,  developing  every  inven- 
tion, which  would  enable  her  to  master  the 
European  world;  and  after  mastering  the 

[6] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

European  world,  to  dominate  the  rest  of  the 
world.  Everybody  had  been  looking  on.  Ev- 
erybody had  known.  For  example,  it  was 
known  in  every  war  office  in  Europe,  and  in 
the  War  Department  at  Washington,  that  the 
Germans  not  only  had  a vast  supply  of  great 
field  guns  but  that  they  had  ammunition 
enough  for  every  one  of  those  guns  to  exhaust 
the  gun.  Yet  we  were  all  living  in  a fool’s  par- 
adise. We  thought  that  Germany  meant  what 
she  said— that  she  was  armed  for  defense; 
that  she  would  never  use  that  great  store  of 
force  against  the  rest  of  her  fellow  men.  Why, 
it  was  foreordained  the  minute  Germany  con- 
ceived these  purposes  that  she  should  do  the 
thing  which  she  did  in  1914,  - 
What  happened?  You  will  remember  that  a 
Prince  of  the  House  of  Austria  was  slain  in 
one  of  the  cities  of  Serbia.  Not  assassinated 
by  anybody  over  whom  the  Government  of 
Serbia  had  any  control,  but  assassinated  by 
some  man  who  had  in  his  heart  the  memory  of 
something  that  was  intolerable  to  him,  that 
had  been  done  to  the  people  that  he  belonged 
to.  Serbia  was  one  of  the  little  kingdoms  of 
Europe.  She  had  no  strength  which  any  of  the 
great  powers  needed  to  fear,  and  as  we  see  the 
war  now,  Germany  and  those  who  conspired 
with  her  made  a pretext  of  that  assassination 
to  make  unconscionable  demands  of  the  weak 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

and  helpless  Kingdom  of  Serbia.  Not  with  a 
view  to  bringing  about  an  acquiescence  in 
those  demands,  but  with  a view  to  bringing 
about  a conflict  in  which  other  purposes  quite 
separate  from  the  purposes  connected  with 
these  demands  could  be  achieved.  Poor  Ser- 
bia, in  her  sudden  terror,  with  the  memory  of 
things  that  had  happened  before  and  might 
happen  again,  practically  yielded  to  every  de- 
mand, and  with  regard  to  a little  portion  of 
the  ultimatum  said  she  would  like  to  talk  it 
over  with  them,  and  they  did  not  dare  to  wait. 

Just  as  soon  as  these  demands  were  made 
on  Serbia  the  other  Governments  of  Europe 
sent  telegraphic  messages  to  Berlin  and  Vien- 
na asking  that  the  matter  be  brought  into 
conference,  and  the  significant  circumstance 
of  the  beginning  of  this  war  is  that  the  Aus- 
trian and  German  Governments  did  not  dare 
to  discuss  the  demands  on  Serbia  or  the  pur- 
poses which  they  had  in  view.  You  dare  not 
lay  a bad  case  before  mankind.  It  is  univer- 
sally admitted  on  the  other  side  of  the  water 
that  if  they  had  gone  into  international  con- 
ference on  the  Austrian  demands  the  war  nev- 
er would  have  been  begun.  There  was  an  in- 
sistent demand  from  London,  for  example,  by 
the  British  foreign  minister,  that  the  Cabi- 
nets of  Europe  should  be  allowed  time  to  con- 
fer with  the  Governments  of  Vienna  and  Ber- 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

lin  so  as  to  see  if  war  could  not  be  avoided, 
and  the  Governments  at  Vienna  and  Berlin 
did  not  dare  admit  time  for  discussion. 

You  will  remember  how  the  conscience  of 
mankind  was  shocked  by  what  Germany  did; 
not  merely  by  the  circumstances  to  which  I 
have  already  adverted,  that  unconscionable 
demands  were  made  upon  a little  nation  which 
could  not  resist,  but  that  immediately  upon 
the  beginning  of  the  war  the  solemn  engage- 
ments of  treaty  were  cast  on  one  side,  and  the 
chief  representative  of  the  Imperial  Govern-  ^ r0k 
ment  of  Germany  said  that  when  national! 
purposes  were  under  consideration  treaties 
were  mere  scraps  of  paper;  and  immediately 
upon  that  declaration,  the  German  armies  in- 
vaded the  territories  of  Belgium  which  they 
had  engaged  should  be  inviolate,  invaded 
those  territories  with  the  half-avowed  purpose 
that  Belgium  was  necessary  to  be  permanent- 
ly retained  by  Germany  in  order  that  she 
should  have  the  proper  frontage  on  the  sea 
and  the  proper  advantage  in  her  contest  with 
the  other  nations  of  the  world.  So  that  the  act 
which  was  characteristic  of  the  beginning  of 
this  war  was  a violation  of  the  territorial  in- 
tegrity of  the  Kingdom  of  Belgium. 

The  world  did  not  realize  in  1914  that  it 
had  come  to  the  final  grapple  of  principle.  The 
old  order  of  things  the  rest  of  the  world  seemed 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

to  have  got,  in  some  sense,  used  to.  The  old 
order  of  things  was  not  to  depend  upon  the 
general  moral  judgment  of  mankind,  not  to 
base  policies  upon  international  right,  but  to 
base  policies  upon  international  power.  So 
there  were  drawn  together  groups  of  nations 
which  stood  armed,  facing  one  another,  which 
stood  drawing  their  power  from  the  vitality 
of  people  who  did  not  wish  to  be  subordinated 
to  them,  drawing  their  vitality  from  the  ener- 
gy of  great  peoples  who  did  not  wish  to  devote 
their  energy  to  force,  but  wished  to  devote 
their  energy  to  peace.  The  world  thought  it 
was  inevitable.  This  group  of  nations  thought 
that  it  represented  one  set  of  principles, 
that  group  of  nations  thought  that  it  repre- 
sented another  set  of  principles,  and  that  the 
best  that  could  be  accomplished  in  the  world 
was  this  that  they  used  to  call  the  balance  of 
power. 

Notice  the  phrase!  Not  the  balance  that 
you  try  to  maintain  in  a court  of  justice,  not 
the  scales  of  justice,  but  the  scales  of  force; 
one  great  force  balanced  against  another  force. 
Every  bit  of  the  policy  of  the  world,  interna- 
tionally speaking,  was  made  in  the  interest  of 
some  national  advantage  on  the  part  of  the 
stronger  nations  of  the  world.  It  was  either 
the  advantage  of  Germany  or  the  advantage 
of  Great  Bri  tain  or  the  advantage  of  Italy  or 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

the  advantage  of  Japan.  We  thought  that  the 
cool  spaces  of  the  ocean  on  the  east  and  west 
of  us  would  keep  us  from  the  infections  that 
came,  arising  like  miasmatic  mists,  out  of  that 
arrangement  of  power  and  of  suspicion  and  of 
dread. 

The  only  people  in  Europe  who  instinctive- 
ly realized  what  was  going  to  happen  and  did 
happen  in  1914  was  the  French  people.  For 
nearly  fifty  years,  ever  since  the  settlement 
which  took  Alsace-Lorraine  away  from  them 
in  1871,  they  had  expected  it.  For  nearly  fifty 
years  they  had  dreaded  by  the  exercise  of 
German  force  the  very  thing  that  happened. 
But  the  other  nations  took  it  lightly.  There 
were  wise  men  in  Great  Britain,  there  were 
wise  men  in  the  United  States,  who  pointed 
out  to  us  not  only  what  they  suspected,  but 
what  we  all  knew  with  regard  to  the  prepara- 
tions for  the  use  of  force  in  Europe.  Nobody 
was  ignorant  of  what  Germany  was  doing. 
What  we  shut  our  eyes  against  deliberately 
was  the  probability  that  she  would  make  the 
use  of  her  preparation  that  she  did  finally 
make  of  it.  Her  military  men  published  books 
and  told  us  what  they  were  going  to  do  with 
it,  but  we  dismissed  them.  We  said,  “The 
thing  is  a nightmare.  The  man  is  a crank.  It 
cannot  be  that  he  speaks  for  a great  Govern- 
ment!” Very  well,  could  it  not  happen?  Did 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

it  not  happen?  Are  we  satisfied  now  what  the 
balance  of  power  means?  It  means  that  the 
stronger  force  will  sometimes  be  exercised  or 
an  attempt  be  made  to  exercise  it  to  crush  the 
other  powers. 

It  was  only  by  slow  degrees  that  we  realized 
that  we  had  any  part  in  the  war.  We  started 
the  forces  in  1776,  as  I have  said,  that  made 
this  war  inevitable,  but  we  were  a long  lame 
realizing  that,  after  all,  that  was  what  was~atr 
issue.  We  had  been  accustomed  to  regarding 
Europe  as  a field  of  intriguing,  of  rival  ambi- 
tions, and  of  attempts  to  establish  empire,  and 
at  first  we  merely  got  the  impression  that  this 
was  one  of  the  usual  European  wars,  to  which, 
unhappily,  mankind  had  become  only  too  ac- 
customed. You  know  how  unwilling  we  were 
to  go  into  it.  I can  speak  for  myself.  I made 
every  effort  to  keep  this  country  out  of  the 
war,  until  it  came  to  my  conscience,  as  it  came 
to  yours,  that  after  all  it  was  our  war  as  well 
as  Europe’s  war,  that  the  ambition  of  these 
central  empires  was  directed  against  nothing 
less  than  the  liberty  of  the  world.  We  tried  to 
convince  ourselves  that  no  matter  what  hap- 
pened on  the  other  side  of  the  sea,  no  obliga- 
tion of  duty  rested  upon  us,  and  finally  we 
found  the  currents  of  humanity  too  strong  for 
us.  We  found  that  a great  consciousness  was 
welling  up  in  us  that  this  was  not  a local  cause, 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

that  this  was  not  a struggle  that  was  to  be 
confined  to  Europe,  or  confined  to  Asia,  to 
which  it  had  spread,  but  that  it  was  something 
that  involved  the  very  fate  of  civilization; 
that  there  was  one  great  nation  in  the  world 
that  could  not  afford  to  stay  out  of  it. 

We  were  caught  in  this  thing  by  the  action 
of  a nation  utterly  unlike  ourselves.  What  I 
mean  to  say  is  that  the  German  nation,  the 
German  people,  had  no  choice  whatever  as  to 
whether  it  was  to  go  into  that  war  or  not,  did 
not  know  that  it  was  going  into  it  until  its 
men  were  summoned  to  the  colors.  I remem- 
ber not  once,  but  often,  sitting  at  the  Cabinet 
table  in  Washington,  I asked  my  colleagues 
what  their  impression  was  of  the  opinion  of 
the  country  before  we  went  into  the  war,  and 
I remember  one  day  one  of  my  colleagues  said 
to  me,  “Mr.  President,  I think  the  people  of 
the  country  would  take  your  advice  and  do 
what  you  suggested.”  “Why,”  I said,  “that  is 
not  what  I am  waiting  for;  that  is  not  enough. 
If  they  cannot  go  in  with  a whoop,  there  is  no 
use  of  their  going  in  at  all.  I do  not  want  them 
to  wait  on  me.  I am  waiting  on  them.  I want 
to  know  what  the  conscience  of  this  country 
is  speaEingTffwant  to  know  what  the  purpose 
is  arising  m the  minds  of  the  people  of  this 

— . I — - In  li  ■ ■ ' 

country  with  regard  to  this  world  situation..  I 
must  wait  until  I know  that  I am  interpreting 


13 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

3 their  purpose,  then  I will  know  that  I have 
got  an  irresistible  power  behind  me.”  And 
V ' tSiat  is  exactly  what  happened  !When  I thought 
i \ “’  l heard  that  voice,  it  was  then  that  I proposed 
to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  that  we 
should  include  ourselves  in  the  challenge  that 
Germany  was  giving  to  mankind. 

That  is  what  is  now  appreciated  as  it  was 
not  at  first  appreciated  on  the  other  side  of 
the  sea.  They  wondered  and  wondered  why 
we  did  not  come  in.  They  had  come  to  the 
rather  cynical  conclusion  that  we  did  not  come 
in  because  we  were  making  money  out  of  this 
war,  and  did  not  want  to  spoil  the  profitable 
game;  and  then  at  last  they  saw  what  we  were 
waiting  for — in  order  that  the  whole  plot  of 
the  German  purpose  should  develop,  in  order 
that  we  might  see  how  the  intrigue  of  that 
plot  had  penetrated  our  own  life,  how  the 
poison  was  spreading,  and  how  it  was  noth- 
ing less  than  a design  against  the  freedom 
of  the  world. 

Until  we  went  into  this  war,  it  was  the  al- 
most universal  impression  of  the  world  that 
our  idealism  was  a mere  matter  of  words;  that 
what  we  were  interested  in  was  getting  on  in 
the  world  and  making  as  much  as  we  should 
out  of  it.  That  was  the  sum  and  substance  of 
the  usual  opinion  of  us  outside  of  America; 
and  in  the  short  space  that  we  were  in  this 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

war  that  opinion  was  absolutely  reversed. 
Consider  what  they  saw!  The  flower  of  our 
youth  sent  three  and  four  thousand  miles 
away  from  their  homes,  a home  which  could 
not  be  directly  touched  by  the  flames  of  that 
war,  sent  to  foreign  fields  to  mix  with  foreign 
and  alien  armies  to  fight  for  a cause  which 
they  recognized  as  the  common  cause  of  man- 
kind, and  not  the  peculiar  cause  of  America ! 
It  caused  a revulsion  of  feeling,  a revulsion  of 
attitude  which  I dare  say,  has  never  been  par- 
allelled in  the  world. 

AMERICAN  SOLDIERS  IN  EUROPE 

We  went  in  just  in  time.  The  hope  of 
Europe  had  sunk  very  low  when  American 
troops  began  to  throng  overseas.  One  of  the 
most  beautiful  stories  I know  is  the  story  that 
we  heard  in  France  about  the  first  effect  of  the 
American  soldiers  when  they  got  over  there. 
The  French  did  not  believe  at  first,  the  Brit- 
ish did  not  believe,  that  we  could  finally  get 
2,000,000  over  there.  The  most  that  they 
hoped  at  first  was  that  a few  American  sol- 
diers would  restore  their  morale,  for  let  me 
say  their  morale  was  gone.  The  beautiful 
story  to  which  I referred  is  this — the  testi- 
mony that  all  of  them  rendered  that  they  got 
their  morale  back  the  minute  they  saw  the 
eyes  of  those  boys!  There  was  no  curtain  in 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

front  of  the  retina  of  those  eyes!  They  were 
American  eyes ! There  was  something  in  their 
eyes  they  had  never  seen  in  the  eyes  of  any 
other  army — the  feeling  that  penetrates  every 
American,  that  there  is  a great  future,  that  a 
man  can  handle  his  own  fortunes,  that  it  is 
his  right  to  have  his  place  in  the  world,  and 
that  no  man  that  he  does  not  choose  is  his 
master!  That  is  what  these  people  saw  in  the 
eyes  of  the  American  boys  who  carried  their 
arms  across  the  sea.  There  was  America  in 
every  one  of  those  lively  eyes,  and  America 
was  not  looking  merely  at  the  fields  of  France, 
was  not  merely  seeking  to  defeat  Germany; 
she  was  seeking  to  defeat  everything  that  Ger- 
many’s action  represented,  and  to  see  to  it 
that  there  never  happened  such  a thing  again ! 

You  remember  what  happened  in  that  fate- 
ful battle  in  which  our  men  first  took  part. 
You  remember  how  the  French  lines  had  been 
beaten  and  separated  and  broken  at  Chateau- 
Thierry,  and  you  remember  how  the  gates 
seemed  open  for  the  advancement  of  the  Ger- 
mans upon  Paris.  Then  a body  of  men,  a little 
body  of  men — American  soldiers  and  Ameri- 
can Marines — against  the  protests  of  French 
officers,  against  the  command  of  the  remote 
commanders,  nevertheless  dared  to  fill  that 
breach,  stopped  that  advance,  turned  the 
Germans  back,  and  never  allowed  them  to 

[ 16] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

turn  their  faces  forward  again.  They  were  ad- 
vised to  go  back,  and  they  asked  the  naive 
American  question,  “What  did  we  come  over 
here  for?  We  did  not  come  over  here  to  go 
back ! We  came  over  here  to  go  forward !”  “We 
didn’t  come  over  here  to  wait,  we  came  over 
here  to  fight!”  and  their  very  audacity,  their 
very  indifference  to  danger,  changed  the  mo- 
rale of  the  battle  field.  They  were  not  fighting 
prudently;  they  were  going  to  get  there!  And 
they  never  went  in  any  other  direction!  The 
men  who  went  to  Chateau-Thierry,  the  men 
who  went  into  Belleau  Wood,  the  men  who 
did  what  no  other  troops  had  been  able  to  do 
in  the  Argonne,  never  thought  of  turning 
back.  They  had  gone  to  Europe  to  go  the 
whole  way  toward  the  realization  of  the  teach- 
ing which  their  fathers  had  handed  down  to 
them.  There  never  were  crusaders  that  went 
to  the  Holy  Land  in  the  old  ages  that  we  read 
about  that  were  more  truly  devoted  to  a holy 
cause  than  these  gallant,  incomparable  sons 
of  America. 

Ask  this  question  of  yourselves,  mothers 
and  fathers  and  wives  and  sweethearts,  who 
sent  their  beloved  young  men  to  France. 
What  did  you  send  them  there  for?  What 
made  you  proud  that  they  were  going?  What 
made  you  willing  that  they  should  go?  Did 
you  think  that  they  were  going  to  aggrandize 

[ 17  ] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

America  in  some  way?  It  is  not  a handsome 
enterprise  for  any  great  nation  to  go  into  a 
war  merely  to  reduce  another  nation  to  obedi- 
ence! Did  you  think  that  they  were  going  to 
take  something  for  America  that  had  belonged 
to  somebody  else?  Did  you  think  they  were 
going  in  a quarrel  which  they  had  provoked 
and  must  maintain?  It  is  so  easy,  with  the 
strong  tides  of  our  life,  to  be  swept  away  from 
one  situation  into  another  and  to  forget  the 
real  depths  of  meaning  which  lie  underneath 
the  things  that  we  are  merely  touching  the 
surface  of.  Therefore,  it  might  be  useful  if  I 
remind  you  of  a few  things,  lest  we  forget, — if 
I asked  permission  to  read  you  the  concluding 
passage  of  the  address  in  which  I requested 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  ac- 
cept Germany’s  challenge  of  war: 

“We  shall  fight,”  I said,  “for  the  things 
“which  we  have  always  carried  nearest  our 
“hearts,  for  democracy,  for  the  right  of  those 
“who  submit  to  authority  to  have  a voice  in 
“their  own  governments,  for  the  rights  and  lib- 
erties of  small  nations,  for  a universal  domin- 
ion of  right  by  such  a concert  of  free  peoples 
“as  will  bring  peace  and  safety  to  all  nations 
“and  make  the  world  itself  at  last  free.  To  such 
“a  task  we  can  dedicate  our  lives  and  our  for- 
tunes, everything  that  we  are  and  everything 
“that  we  have,  with  the  pride  of  those  who 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

“know  that  the  day  has  come  when  America  is 
“privileged  to  spend  her  blood  and  her  might 
“for  the  principles  that  gave  her  birth  and  the 
“happiness  and  the  peace  which  we  have  treas- 
ured. God  helping  her,  she  can  do  no  other.” 
That  is  the  program  we  started  out  on. 
That  is  the  program  which  all  America  adopted 
without  respect  of  party,  and  shall  we  now 
hesitate  to  carry  it  out? 

You  were  proud  that  they  should  go  be- 
cause they  were  going  on  an  errand  of  self- 
sacrifice,  in  the  interest  of  mankind.  This  sac- 
rifice was  made  in  order  that  other  sons  should 
not  be  called  upon  for  a similar  gift,  the  gift  of 
life,  the  gift  of  all  that  died.  These  men  were 
crusaders.  They  were  not  going  forth  to  prove 
the  might  of  the  United  States.  They  were  go- 
ing forth  to  prove  the  might  of  justice  and  of 
right,  and  all  the  world  accepted  them  as  cru- 
saders, and  their  transcendent  achievement 
has  made  all  the  world  believe  in  America  as 
it  believed  in  no  other  nation  organized  in  the 
modern  world.  We  were  a long  time  seeing 
that  we  belonged  in  the  war,  but  just  as  soon 
as  the  real  issues  of  it  became  apparent  we 
knew  that  we  belonged  there.  We  did  an  un- 
precedented thing.  We  threw  the  whole  power 
of  a great  nation  into  a quarrel  with  the  origi- 
nation of  which  it  had  nothing  to  do. 

Let  us  never  forget  those  years.  Let  us  never 

[ 19] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

forget  the  purpose — the  high  purpose,  the  dis- 
interested purpose — with  which  America  lent 
its  strength,  not  for  its  own  glory  but  for  the 
defense  of  mankind.  I think  there  is  nothing 
that  appeals  to  the  imagination  more  in  the 
history  of  men  than  those  convoyed  fleets 
crossing  the  ocean  with  the  millions  of  Ameri- 
can soldiers  aboard — those  crusaders,  those 
men  who  loved  liberty  enough  to  leave  their 
homes  and  fight  for  them  upon  the  distant 
fields  of  battle,  those  men  who  swung  into  the 
open  as  if  in  fulfillment  of  the  long  prophecy 
of  American  history. 

What  a halo  and  glory  surrounds  those  old 
men  whom  we  now  greet  with  such  reverence, 
the  men  who  were  the  soldiers  in  our  Civil 
W ar ! They  saved  a Nation ! When  these  young- 
sters grow  old  who  have  come  back  from  the 
fields  of  France,  what  a halo  will  be  around 
their  brows ! They  saved  the  world ! They  are 
of  the  same  stuff  as  those  old  veterans  of  the 
Civil  War.  I was  born  and  bred  in  the  South, 
but  I can  pay  that  tribute  with  all  my  heart 
to  the  men  who  saved  the  Union.  It  ought  to 
have  been  saved!  It  was  the  greatest  thing 
that  men  had  conceived  up  to  that  time.  Now 
we  come  to  a greater  thing — to  the  union  of 
great  nations  in  conference  upon  the  interests 
of  peace.  That  is  the  fruitage,  the  fine  and  ap- 
propriate fruitage  of  what  these  men  achieved 

[ 20] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

upon  fields  of  France.  I do  not  hesitate  to  say, 
as  a sober  interpretation  of  history,  that  Amer- 
ican soldiers  saved  the  liberties  of  the  world. 

Shall  the  great- sacrifice  that  we  made  in 
this  war  be  in  vain,  or  shall  it  not?  It  is  very 
important  that  we  should  not  forget  what  this 
war  meant.  I am  amazed  at  the  indications 
that  on  the  other  side  of  the  water  they  are 
apt  to  forget  what  they  went  through.  In 
order  that  we  may  not  forget,  I brought  (give) 
the  figures  as  to  what  this  war  meant  to  the 
world.  If  I did  not  have  them  on  official  au- 
thority I would  deem  them  incredible.  They 
are  too  big  for  the  imagination  of  men  who  do 
not  handle  big  things.  Here  is  the  cost  of  the 
war  in  money,  exclusive  of  what  we  loaned 
one  another— a grand  total  of  direct  war  costs 
of  $i  86,000,000,000 — almost  the  capital  of  the 
world.  The  expenditures  of  the  United  States 
were  at  the  rate  of  a million  dollars  an  hour 
for  two  years,  including  night-time  with  day- 
time! The  battle  deaths  during  the  war,  the 
total  for  all  the  belligerents  was  7,450,000 — 
just  about  seven  and  a half  million  killed.  The 
totals  for  wounded  are  not  obtainable  except 
our  own.  Our  own  wounded  were  230,000,  ex- 
cluding those  who  were  killed.  The  total  of  all 
battle  deaths  in  all  the  wars  from  the  year 
1793  to  1 914  was  something  under  6,000,000 
men,  so  that  about  a million  and  a half  more 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

men  were  killed  in  this  war  than  in  all  the 
wars  of  something  more  than  one  hundred 
preceding  years.  These  are  terrible  facts  and 
we  ought  never  to  forget  them. 

This  nation  went  into  this  war  to  see  it 
through  to  the  end,  and  the  end  has  not  come 
yet.  This  is  the  beginning  not  of  the  war,  but 
of  the  processes  which  are  going  to  render  a 
war  like  this  impossible.  The  past  is  only  a 
prediction  of  the  future,  and  all  this  terrible 
thing  that  your  brothers  and  husbands  and 
sweethearts  have  been  through  may  have  to 
be  gone  through  with  again. 

The  task,  that  great  and  gallant  task,  which 
our  soldiers  performed  is  only  half  finished. 
Their  part  was  the  negative  part  merely.  They 
were  sent  over  there  to  see  that  a malign  influ- 
ence did  not  interfere  with  the  just  fortunes  of 
the  world.  They  stopped  that  influence,  but 
they  did  not  accomplish  anything  construc- 
tive. They  prevented  a great  wrong.  They  pre- 
vented it  with  a spirit  and  a courage  and  with 
an  ability  that  will  always  be  written  on  the 
brightest  pages  of  our  record  of  gallantry  and 
of  force.  I do  not  know  when  I have  been  as 
proud,  as  an  American,  as  when  I have  seen 
our  boys  deploy  on  the  other  side  of  the  sea. 
On  Christmas  day,  on  an  open  stretch  of  coun- 


[22] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

try,  I saw  a great  Division1  march  past  me, 
with  all  the  arms  of  the  service,  walking  with 
that  swing  which  is  so  familiar  to  our  eyes, 
with  that  sense  of  power  and  confidence  and 
audacity  which  is  so  characteristic  of  Amer- 
ica, and  I seemed  to  see  the  force  that  had 
saved  the  world ! But  they  merely  prevented 
something.  They  merely  prevented  a particu- 
lar nation  from  doing  a particular,  unspeak- 
able wrong  to  civilization,  and  their  task  is 
not  complete  unless  we  see  to  it  that  it  has 
not  to  be  done  over  again,  unless  we  fulfill  the 
promise  which  we  made  to  them  and  to  our- 
selves that  this  was  not  only  a war  to  defeat' 
Germany,  but  a war  to  prevent  the  recurrence 
of  any  such  wrong  as  Germany  had  attempted; 
that  it  was  a war  to  put  an  end  to  the  wars  of 
aggression  forever. 

We  undertook  a great  war  for  a definite 
purpose.  That  definite  purpose  is  carried  out 
in  a great  Treaty.  While  victory  has  been  won, 
it  has  been  won  only  over  the  force  of  a par- 
ticular group  of  nations.  It  has  not  been  won 
over  the  passions  of  those  nations,  or  over  the 
passions  of  thematLons  that  were  set  against 
them.  This  Treaty  tries  to  deal  with  some  of 
the  elements  of  passion  which  were  likely  at 

*A  composite  Divison  of  troops  from  the  26th,  29th,  77th, 
80th  and  82nd  Divisions,  Major  General  Robert  Alexander, 
Commanding. 

[23] 


THE  WORLD  WAR 

any  time  to  blaze  out  in  the  world  and  which 
did  blaze  out  and  set  the  world  on  fire.  And  do 
not  believe  that  civilization  is  saved  now. 
There  were  passions  let  loose  upon  the  field  of 
the  world  by  that  war  which  have  not  grown 
quiet  yet,  which  will  not  grow  quiet  for  a long 
time.  The  harness  that  is  to  unite  nations  is 
more  necessary  now  than  it  ever  was  before, 
and  unless  there  is  this  assurance  of  combined 
action  before  wrong  is  attempted,  wrong  will 
be  attempted  just  as  soon  as  the  most-ambi- 
tious nations  can  recover  from  the  financial 
stress  of  this  war. 

The  completion  of  the  work  of  those  men  is 
this,  that  the  thing  that  they  fought  to  stop 
shall  never  be  attempted  again.  There  seems 
to  me  to  stand  between  uslmcTthe  rejection  or 
qualification  of  this  Treaty  the  serried  ranks  of 
those  dear  boys  in  khaki,  not  only  those  boys 
who  came  home,  but  those  dear  ghosts  that 
still  deploy  upon  the  fields  of  France. 


[24] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 


T AM  going  to  try  to  point  out  some  of  the 
things  that  are  the  salient  and  outstanding 
characteristics  of  this  Treaty. 

I have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  in  spirit 
and  essence  it  is  an  American  document,  and 
if  you  will  bear  with  me,  for  this  is  a subject 
for  examination  and  discussion,  I will  remind 
you  of  some  of  the  things  that  we  have  long 
desired  and  which  are  at  last  accomplished  in 
this  Treaty. 

The  Treaty  begins  with  the  Covenant  of  the 
League  of  Nations,  which  is  intended  to  oper- 
ate as  a partnership,  a permanent  partner- 
ship, of  the  great  and  free  self-governing  peo- 
ples of  the  world  to  stand  sponsor  for  the 
right  and  for  civilization.  Notice  is  given  in 
the  very  first  articles  of  the  Treaty  that  here- 
after it  will  not  be  a matter  of  conjecture 
whether  the  other  greaFnations  of  the  world 
will  combine  against  a wrongdoer,  but  a mat- 
ter of  certainty-  that  hereafter  nations  con- 
templating what  the  Government  of  Germany 
contemplated  will  not  have  to  conjecture 
whether  Great  Britain  and  France  and  Italy 
and  the  great  United  States  will  join  hands 
against  them,  but  will  know  that  mankind,  in 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

serried  ranks,  will  defend  to  the  last  the  rights 
of  human  beings  wherever  they  are.  By  com- 
mon consent  that  was  put  first,  because  by 
common  consent,  without  it  theTreaty  cannot 
be  worked,  and  without  it,  it  is  a mere  tem- 
porary arrangement  with  Germany. 

I am  not  going  to  speak  here  particularly  of 
the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations.  I am 
going  to  point  out  to  you  what  theTreaty  as  a 
whole  is. 

It  is  a document  unique  in  the  history  of 
the  world  for  many  reasons,  and  one  of  the 
things  that  made  it  great  was  that  it  was  pen- 
etrated throughout  with  the  principles  to 
which  America  has  devoted  her  life.  Let  me 
hasten  to  say  that  one  of  the  most  delightful 
circumstances  of  the  work  on  the  other  side 
of  the  water  was  that  I discovered  what  we 
called  American  principles  had  penetrated  to 
the  heart  and  to  the  understanding  not  only 
of  the  great  peoples  of  Europe  but  to  the 
hearts  and  understandings  of  the  great  men 
who  were  leading  the  peoples  of  Europe,  and 
when  these  principles  were  written  in to_  this 
Treaty^-they  were  written  there  by  common 
consent  and  common  conviction,  but  it  re- 
mains true  nevertheless,  that  principles  were 
written  into  that  Treaty  which  were  never 
written  into  any  great  international  under- 
standing before,  and  that  they  had  their  nat- 

[26] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

ural  birth  and  origin  in  this  dear  country  to 
which  we  have  devoted  our  life  and  service. 

In  the  first  place,  it  seeks  to  punish  one  of 
the  greatest  wrongs  in  history,  the  wrong 
which  Germany  sought  to  do  to  the  world 
and  to  civilization.  The  thing  that  Germany 
attempted,  if  it  had  succeeded,  would  have 
set  the  civilization  of  the  world  back  a hun- 
dred years.  Germany  tried  to  commit  a crime 
against  civilization,  and  this  Treaty  is  justi- 
fied in  making  Germany  pay  for  that  criminal 
error  up  to  the  ability  of  her  payment.  It  is  a 
very  severe  settlement  with  Germany,  but 
there  Ts  not  anything  in  it  she  did  not  earn. 
Indeed,  she  earned  more  than  she  can  ever  be 
able  to  pay  for,  land  the  punishment  exacted 
of  her  is  not  a punishment  greater  than  she 
can  bear,  and  it  is  absolutely  necessary  in 
order  that  no  other  nation  may  ever  plot  such 
a thing  against  humanity  and  civilization.  It 
is  a Treaty  made  by  men  who  had  no  intention 
of  crushing  the  German  people,  but  who  did 
mean  to  have  it  burnt  into  the  consciousness 
of  the  German  people,  and  through  their  con- 
sciousness into  the  apprehension  of  the  world, 
that  no  people  could  afford  to  live  under  a 
government  which  was  not  controlled  by 
their  purpose  and  will  and  which  was  at  liber- 
ty to  impose  secret  ambitions  upon  the  civili- 
zation of  the  world.  It  was  intended  as  notice 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

to  all  mankind  that  any  government  that  at- 
tempted what  Germany  attempted  would 
meet  with  the  same  just  retribution.  All  that 
this  Treaty  amounts  to,  so  far  as  Germany  is 
concerned,  is  that  she  shall  be  obliged  to  pay 
every  dollar  that  she  can  afford  to  pay  to  re- 
pair the  damage  that  she  did;  except  for  ter- 
ritorial arrangements  which  it  includes,  that 
is  practically  the  whole  of  theTreaty  so  far  as 
concerns  Germany.  Germany’s  worst  punish- 
ment is  notin  the  Treaty,  it  is  in  her  relations 
wi  th  the  rest  ofmankind  for  the  next  generation. 

No  indemnity  of  any  sort  was  claimed, 
merely  reparation,  merely  paying  for  the  de- 
struction done,  merely  making  good  the  losses 
so  far  as  such  losses  could  be  made  good  which 
she  had  unjustly  inflicted,  not  upon  the  Gov- 
ernments, for  the  reparation  is  not  to  go  to  the 
Governments,  but  upon  the  people  whose 
rights  she  had  trodden  upon  with  absolute  ab- 
sence of  everything  that  even  resembled  pity. 
Even  in  the  terms  of  reparation  a method  is 
devised  by  which  the  reparations  shall  be  ad- 
justed to  Germany’s  ability  to  pay  it.  There 
is  a method  of  adjustment  in  that  Treaty  by 
which  the  reparation  shall  not  be  pressed  be=_. 
vond  the  point  which  Germany  can  pay,  but 

that 


Germany  can  pay,  which  is  just,  which  is 
righteous. 

[ 28  ] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

We  tried  to  be  just  to  Germany,  and  when 
we  had  heard  her  arguments  and  examined 
every  portion  of  the  counter  proposals  that 
she  made,  we  wrote  the  Treaty  in  its  final 
form  and  then  said,  “Sign  here.”  What  else 
did  our  boys  die  for?  Did  they  die  in  order 
that  we  might  ask  Germany’s  leave  to  com- 
plete our  victory?  They  died  in  order  that  we 
might  say  to  Germany  what  the  terms  of  vic- 
tory were  in  the  interest  of  justice  and  of 
peace,  and  we  were  entitled  to  take  the  course 
that  we  did  take.  It  would  have  been  intoler- 
able if  there  had  been  anything  else.  What  has 
not  been  borne  in  upon  the  consciousness  of 
some  of  our  people  is  that  although  most  of 
the  words  of  theTreaty  are  devoted  to  the  set- 
tlement with  Germany,  the  greater  part  of  the 
meaning  of  its  provisions  is  devoted  to  the  set- 
tlement of  the  world. 

It  is  a world  settlement,  the  first  ever  at- 
tempted, attempted  upon  broad  lines  which 
were  first  laid  down  in  America.  You  remem- 
ber that  we  laid  down  Fourteen  Points  which 
should  contain  the  principles  of  the  settle- 
ment. They  were  not  my  points.  In  every  one 
of  them  | was  conscientiously  trying  to  read 
the  thought  of  the  people  of  the  United  States, 
and  after  I uttered  those  points  I had  every 
assurance  given  me  that  could  be  given  me 
that  they  did  speak  the  moral  judgment  of 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

the  United  States.  Then  when  it  came  to  that 
critical  period,  when  it  was  evident  that  the 
war  was  coming  to  its  critical  end,  all  the  na- 
tions engaged  in  the  war  accepted  those  four- 
teen principles  explicitly  as  the  basis  of  the 
armistice  and  the  basis  of  the  peace.  All  of 
Europe  was  aware  that  what  was  being  done 
was  building  up  an  American  peace.  Every 
man  who  looks  at  it  without  party  prejudice 
and  as  an  American,  will  find  in  that  Treaty 
more  things  that  are  genuinely  American  than 
were  ever  put  into  any  similar  document 
before. 

One  of  the  things  that  America  has  had 
most  at  heart  throughout  her  existence  has 
been  that  there  should  be  substituted  for  the 
brutal  processes  of  war  the  friendly  processes 
of  consultation  and  arbitration,  and  that  is 
done  in  theCovenantof  theLeagueof  Nations. 
Consultation,  discussion,  is  written  all  over 
the  face  of  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of-Na- 
tions,  for  the  heart  of  it  is  that  the  nations 
promise  not  to  go  to  war  until  they  have  con- 
sulted, until  they  have  discussed,  until  all  the 
facts  in  the  controversy  have  been  laid  before 
the  court  which  represents  the  common  opin- 
ion of  mankind.  The  League  of  Nations  substi- 
tutes discussion  for  fight,  and  without  discus- 
sion there  will  be  fight.  One  of  the  greatest 
difficulties  we  have  been  through  in  the-past 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

is  in  getting  men  to  understand  that  funda- 
mental thing. 


DISARMAMENT 

And  there  was  another  thing  that  we  wished 
to  accomplish  that  is  accomplished  in  this 
document.  We  wanted  disarmament,  and  this 
document  provides  it  in  the  only  possiblgtway 
for  disarmament,  b y xommon  agr eem ent /"Ev- 
ery great  fighting  nation  in  the  world  is  to  be 
a member  of  this  partnership  except  Germany, 
and  inasmuch  as  Germany  has  accepted  a 
limitation  of  her  army  to  100,000  men,  I can 
not  think  for  the  time  being  she  may  be  re- 
garded as  a great  fighting  nation.  Here  in  the 
center  of  Europe  a great  nation  of  more  than 
60,000,000  that  has  agreed  not  to  maintain  an 
army  of  more  than  100,000  men,  and  all 
around  her  the  rest  of  the  world  in  concerted 
partnership  to  see  that  no  other  nation  at- 
tempts what  she  attempted,  and  agreeing 
among  themselves  that  they  will  not  impose 
this  limitation  of  armament  upon  Germany 


themselves.  There  is  no  other  way  to  dispense 
with  great  armaments  except  by  the  common 


armament  and  they  promise  to  agree  upon  a 
plan. 


merely,  but  that  they  will  impose  it  upon 


agreement  of  the  fighting  nations  of  the  world; 
and  here  in  the  agreement.  They  promise  dis- 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 


INTERNATIONAL  COURT 


All  the  nations  agree  to  join  in  devising  a plan 
for  general  disarmament.  You  have  heard 
that  this  Covenant  was  a plan  for  bringing 
on  war.  Well,  it  is  going  to  bring  on  war  by 
means  of  disarmament  and  also  by  establish- 
ing a permanent  court  of  international  justice. 
.When  I voted  for  that,  I was  obeying  theman- 
date  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States.  In 
a very  unexpected  place,  namely,  in  adSavaT 
Appropriation  Bill,  passed  in  1915,  it  is  de- 
clared to  be  the  policy  of  the  United  States  to 
bring  about  a general  disarmament  by  com- 
mon agreement,  and  the  President  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  was  requested  to  call  a conference 
not  later  than  the  close  of  the  then  present 
war  for  the  purpose  of  consulting  and  agree- 
ing upon  a plan  for  a permanent  court  of  in- 
ternational justice;  and  he  was  authorized  in 
case  such  an  agreement  could  be  reached,  to 
stop  the  building  programme  provided  for  by 
that  Naval  Appropriation  Bill.  The  Congress 
of  the  United  States  deliberately  not  only  ac- 
cepted but  directed  the  President  to  promote 
an  agreement  of  this  sort  for  disarmament 
and  a permanent  court  of  international  jus- 
tice. Not  satisfied  with  putting  it  there  once, 
they  put  it  there  several  times;  I mean  in  suc- 
cessive years.  It  even  went  so  far  as  to  make 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

an  appropriation  to  pay  the  expenses  by  a 
continuing  provision  in  the  Naval  Appropria- 
tion Bill.  They  looked  forward  to  it  with  such 
a practical  eye  that  they  contemplated  the 
possibility  of  its  coming  soon  enough  to  stop 
the  building  program  of  that  bill. 

You  know  what  a permanent  court  of  inter- 
national justice  implies.  The  difficulty  which 
is  being  found  with  the  LeagueTffid^YfioTrsdtS' 
that  apparently  the  gentlemetTwho  are~disV 
cussing  it  unfavorably  are  afraid  that  we  will 
be  bound  to  do  something  we  do  not  want  to. 
The  only  way  in  which  you  can  have  impar- 
tial determinations  in  this  world  b Jxyucon- 
sen  ting  to  something  you  do  not  want  to  do. 
Every  time  you  have  a case  in  court  one  or 
other  of  the  parties  has  to  consent  to  do  some- 
thing he  does  not  want  to  do.  There  is  not  a 
case  in  court,  and  there  are  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  them  every  year,  in  which  one  of  the 
parties  is  not  disappointed.  Yet  we  regard' 
that  as  the  foundation  of  civilization,  that  w i 
will  not  fight  about  these  things,  and  that 
when  we  lose  in  court  we  will  take  our  medi- 
cine. Very  well,  I say  the  two  Houses  of  Con- 
gress suggested  that  there  be  an  international 
court  and  suggested  that  they  were  willing  to 
take  their  medicine.  You  cannot  set  up  a 
court  without  respecting  its  decrees.  You  can- 
not  make  a-  toy  ob  it.  Yarn  cannot  make  a 

[ 33  1 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 


mockery  of  it.  If  you,  indeed,  want  a court, 
then  you  must  abide  by  the  judgments  of  the 
court;  and  we  have  declared  already  that  we 
were  willing  to  abide  by  the  judgments  of  a 
court  of  international  justice.  If  we  are,  in- 
deed, headed  toward  peace  with  the  real  pur- 
pose of  our  hearts  engaged,  then  we  must  take 
the  necessary  steps  to  secure  it,  and  we  must 
make  the  necessary  sacrifices  to  secure  it. 


d 


LAND  TITLES  OF  EUROPE1 
ne  of  the  interesting  things  that  this  Treaty 


does  is  to  settle  the  land  titles  of  Europe,  and 
to  settle  them  in  this  way — on  the  principle 
that  every  land  belongs  to  the  people  that  live 
L on  it.  This  is  actually  the  first  time  in  human 
history  that  that  principle  was  ever  recog- 
nized in  a similar  document,  and  yet  that  is 
the  fundamental  American  principle.  The  fun- 
damental American  principle,  is  the  right  of 
the  people  that  live  in  the  country  to  say 
what  shall  be  done  with  that  country.  We 
have  gone  so  far  in  our  assertions  of  popular 
right  that  we  not  only  say  that  the  people 
have  a right  to  have  a government  that  suits 
them,  but  that  they  have  a right  to  change  it 
in  any  respect  at  any  time.  That  principle  lies 
at  the  heart  of  this  Treaty. 

Wherever  there  was  a doubtful  district  we 
applied  the  same  principle,  that  the  people 


[34] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

should  decide  and  not  the  men  sitting  around 
the  peace  table  at  Paris.  It  was  not  easy  to 
draw  the  line.  It  was  not  a surveyor’s  task. 
There  were  not  well  known  points  from  which 
to  start  and  to  which  to  go,  because,  for  ex- 
ample, we  were  trying  to  give  the  Bohemians 
the  lands  where  the  Bohemians  lived,  but  the 
Bohemians  did  not  stop  at  a straight  line.  If 
they  will  pardon  the  expression,  they  slopped 
over.  And  Germans  slopped  over  into  Poland 
and  in  some  cases  there  was  an  almost  inex- 
tricable mixture  of  the  two  populations.  Take 
what  in  Europe  they  call  High  Silesia,  the 
mountainous,  the  upper  portions  of  the  Dis- 
trict of  Silesia.  The  very  great  majority  of  the 
people  in  High  Silesia  are  Poles,  but  the  Ger- 
mans contested  the  statement  that  most  of 
them  werePoles-Everybody  said  that  the  sta- 
tistics lied.  They  said  the  German  statistics 
with  regard  to  High  Silesia,  for  example,  were 
not  true,  because  the  Germans  want  to  make 
it  out  that  the  Germans  were  in  a majority 
there,  and  the  Poles  declared  that  the  Poles 
were  in  a majority  there.  We  said,  “This  is  a 
difficult  business.  Sitting  in  Paris  we  cannot 
tell  by  count  how  many  Poles  there  are  in 
High  Silesia,  or  how  many  Germans,  and  if  we 
could  count  them,  we  cannot  tell  from  Paris, 
what  they  want.  High  Silesia  does  not  belong 
to  us,  it  does  not  belong  to  anybody  but  the 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

people  who  live  in  it.  We  will  do  this:  We  will 
put  that  territory  under  the  care  of  the  League 
of  Nations  for  a little  period;wewill  establish 
a small  armed  force  there,  made  up  of  contin- 
gents out  of  the  different  allied  nations  so  that 
no  one  of  them  would  be  in  control,  and  then 
we  will  hold  a referendum,  and  High  Silesia 
shall  belong  either  to  Germany  or yto_ Poland 
as  the  people  in  High  Silesia  shall  desire.” 
That  is  only  one  case  out  of  half  a dozen.  In 
regions  where  the  make  up  of  the  population 
is  doubtful  or  the  desire  of  the  population  is  as 
yet  unascertained,  the  League  of  Nations  is  to 
be  the  instrumentality  by  which  the  goods  are 
to  be  delivered  to  the  people  to  whom  they 
belong.  No  other  international  conference 
ever  conceived  such  a purpose  and  no  earlier 
conference  of  that  sort  would  have  been  will- 
ing to  carry  out  such  a purpose., 

G EUROPEAN  WATERWAYS 

The  makers  of  the  Treaty  proceeded  to  ar- 
range upon  a cooperative  basis  those  things 
which  had  always  been  arranged  upon  a com- 
petitive basis.  I want  to  mention  a very  prac- 
tical thing  which  most  of  you,  I dare  say,  nev- 
er thought  about.  Most  of  the  rivers  of  Europe 
traverse  the  territory  of  several  nations,  and 
up  to  the  time  of  this  peace  conference  there 
had  been  certain  historic  rights  and  certain 

[36] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

treaty  rights  over  parts  of  the  courses  of  those 
rivers  which  had  embarrassed  the  people  who 
lived  higher  up  upon  the  stream;  just  as  if  the 
great  Mississippi,  for  example,  passed  through 
half  a dozen  states  and  the  people  down  at 
New  Orleans  lived  under  a government  which 
could  control  the  navigation  of  the  lower  parts 
of  the  Mississippi.  There  were  abundant  in- 
stances of  that  sort  in  Europe,  and  this  Treaty 
undertakes  to  internationalize  all  the  great 
waterways  of  that  continent,  to  see  to  it  that 
their  several  portions  are  taken  out  of  nation- 
al control  and  put  under  international  con- 
trol, so  that  the  stream  that  passes  through 
one  nation  shall  be  just  as  free  in  all  its  length 
to  the  sea  as  if  that  nation  owned  the  whole  of 
it,  and  nobody  shall  have  the  right  to  put  a re- 
striction upon  their  passage  to  the  sea.  I men- 
tion this  in  order  to  illustrate  the  heart  of  this 
Treaty,  which  is dodit  out  national  privilege 
and  give  to  every  people  the  full  right  attach- 
ing to  the  territory  in  which  they  live.  The 
Treaty  does  not  stop  there.  It  attempts  to  co- 
ordinate all  the  great  humane  endeavors  of 
the  world.  It  tries  to  bring  under  international 
cooperation  every  effort  to  check  interna- 
tional crime.  I mean  like  that  unspeakable 
traffic  in  women,  like  that  almost  equally  un- 
speakable traffic  in  children.  It  undertakes  a 
new  method  of  cooperation  among  all  the 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

great  Red  Cross  societies  of  the  world.  I say 
without  hesitation  that  no  international  agree- 
ment has  ever  before  been  drawn  up  along 
those  lines,  of  universal  consideration  of  right 
and  the  interest  of  humanity — and  I have  not 
half  described  the  Treaty. 

-'V'MAGNA  charta  of  labor 
You  have  heard  of  the  Covenant  of  the  League 
of  Nations  until,  I dare  say,  you  suppose  that 
is  the  only  thing  in  the  Treaty.  On  the  con- 
trary, there  is  a document  almost  as  extensive 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  treaty  which  is  noth- 
ing less  than  a great  charter  of  liberty  for  the 
working  men  and  women  of  the  world.  This 
Treaty  contains  the  organization  by  which  the 
united  counsels  of  mankind  shall  attempt  to 
lift  the  levels  of  labor  and  see  that  men  who 
are  working  with  their  hands  are  everywhere 
treated  as  they  ought  to  be  treated,  upon 
principles  of  justice  and  equality.  How  many 
laboring  men  dreamed,  when  this  war  began, 
that  four  years  later  it  would  be  possible  for 
all  the  great  nations  of  the  world  to  enter  into 
a covenant  like  that? 

One  of  the  most  striking  and  useful  provi- 
sions of  the  T reaty  is  that  every  member  of  the 
League  of  Nations  undertakes  to  advance  the 
humane  conditions  of  labor  for  men,  women 
and  children,  to  consider  the  interests  of  labor 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

under  its  own  jurisdiction  and  to  try  to  extend 
to  every  nation  with- which  It  Has  any  deal- 
ings, the  standardsof  Tabor  upon  which  it  it- 
self insists;  so  that  America,  which  has  by  no 
means  yet  reached  the  standards  in  these  mat- 
ters which  we  must  and  shall  reach,  but  which 
nevertheless,  is  the  most  advanced  in  the 
world  in  respect  of  the  conditions  of  labor, 
undertakes  to  bring  all  the  influence  it  can 
legitimately  bear  upon  every  nation  with 
which  it  has  any  dealings  to  see  that  labor 
there  is  put  upon  as  good  a footing  as  labor  in 
America!  Perhaps  some  of  you  have  not  kept 
in  mind  the  Seamen’s  Act  which  was  passed  in 
a recent  session  of  Congress.  Under  the  law 
before  that  Act,  seamen  could  be  bound  to  the 
service  of  their  ship  in  such  fashion  that  when 
they  came  to  the  ports  of  the  United  States,  if 
they  tried  to  leave  their  ship,  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  was  bound  to  arrest  them 
and  send  them  back  to  their  ship.  The  Sea- 
men’s Act  abrogates  that  law  and  practically 
makes  it  necessary  for  every  ship  that  would 
take  away  from  the  United  States  the  crew 
that  it  brings  to  it,  shall  pay  American  wages 
to  get  it.  I hear  very  little  said  about  this 
Magna  Charta  of  labor  which  is  embodied  in 
this  Treaty.  It  forecasts  the  day  which  ought 
to  have  come  long  ago,  when  statesmen  will 
realize  that  no  nation  is  fortunate  which  is  not 

[39] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

happy,  and  that  no  nation  can  be  happy  whose 
people  are  not  contented — contented  in  their 
lives  and  fortunate  in  the  circumstances  of 
their  lives. 

The  cost  of  living  at  present  is  a world  con- 
dition. The  high  cost  of  living  is  one  of  those 
things  which  are  so  complicated;  it  ramifies  in 
so  many  directions  that  it  seems  to  me  we  can 
not  do  anything  in  particular  without  know- 
ing how  the  particulars  affect  the  whole.  Until 
the  industrial  world  here  and  elsewhere  is  put 
on  its  feet  you  cannot  finally  handle  the  ques- 
tion of  the  cost  of  living  because  the  cost  of 
living  in  the  last  analysis  depends  upon  the 
things  we  are  always  talking  about  but  do  not 
know  how  to  manage — the  law  of  supply  and 
demand.  It  depends  upon  manufacture  and 
distribution.  It  depends  upon  all  the  normal 
processes  of  the  industrial  and  commercial 
world.  It  depends  upon  international  credit. 
It  depends  upon  shipping.  It  depends  upon 
the  multiplication  of  transportation  facilities 
domestically.  Our  railroads  at  this  moment 
are  not  adequate  to  moving  the  commerce  of 
this  country.  Terminal  facilities  at  the  ports 
are  not  adequate.  The  problem  grows  the 
more  you  think  of  it.  What  we  have  to  put  our 
minds  to  is  an  international  problem,  first  of 
all— to  set  the  commerce  of  the  world  going 
again  and  the  manufacture  of  the  world  going 

[40] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

again.  And  we  have  got  to  do  that  largely.  - 
Then  we  have  got  to  see  that  our  own  produc- 
tion and  our  own  methods  of  finance  and  our 
own  commerce  are  quickened  in  every  way 
that  is  possible. 

Not  only  that  but  we  have  got  to  realize 
that  we  are  face  to  face  with  a great  industrial 
problem  which  does  not  center  in  the  United 
States.  It  centers  elsewhere,  but  which  we 
share  with  the  other  countries  of  the  world. 
That  is  the  relation  between  capital  and  labor, 
between  those  who  employ  and  those  who  are 
employed.  All  through  the  world  the  one  cen- 
tral question  of  civilization  is,  “What  shall  be 
the  conditions  of  labor?”  Why  is  it  that  labor 
organizations  jealously  limit  the  amount  of 
work  that  their  men  can  do  ? Because  they  are 
driving  hard  bargains  with  you;  they  do  not 
feel  that  they  are  your  partners  at  all,  and  so 
long  as  labor  and  capital  are  antagonistic  pro- 
duction is  going  to  be  at  its  minimum.  Just  so 
soon  as  they  are  sympathetic  and  cooperative 
it  is  going  to  abound,  and  that  will  be  one  of 
the  means  of  bringing  down  the  cost  of  living. 
The  laboring  men  of  the  world  are  not  satis- 
fied with  their  relations  with  their  employers. 
Of  course,  I do  not  mean  to  say  that  there  is 
universal  dissatisfaction,  because  here,  there 
and  elsewhere,  in  many  cases  fortunately, 
there  are  very  satisfactory  relations,  but  I am 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

now  speaking  of  the  general  relationship  which 
exists  between  capital  and  labor. 

What  the  world  now  insists  upon  is  the  es- 
tablishment of  industrial  democracy.  There 
must  be  a reconsideration  of  the  structure  of 
our  economic  society.  There  are  all  sorts  of  re- 
adjustments necessary  in  this  country.  There 
must  be  some  very  fundamental  economic  re- 
forms in  this  country.  We  have  got  to  have  a 
constructive  program  with  regard  to  labor, 
and  the  minute  we  get  it  we  will  relieve  the 
strain  all  over  the  world,  because  the  world 
will  accept  our  standards  and  follow  our  ex- 
ample. I cannot  presume  that  I know  how  it 
ought  to  be  done.  I know  the  principle.  The 
principle  is  that  the  interest  of  capital  and  the 
interest  of  labor  are  not  different  but  the 
same,  and  men  of  business  sense  ought  to 
know  how  to  work  out  an  organization  which 
will  express  that  identity  of  interest.  Where 
there  is  identity  of  interest  there  must  be 
community  of  interest.  You  cannot  longer  re- 
gard labor  as  a commodity.  You  have  got  to 
\ regard  it  as  a means  of  association,  the  asso- 
ciation of  physical  skill  and  physical  vigor 
with  the  enterprise  which  is  managed  by  those 
who  represent  capital;  and  when  you  do,  the 
production  of  the  world  is  going  to  go  forward 
by  leaps  and  bounds.  If  you  want  to  realize 
fthe  real  wealth  of  this  country,  then  bring 

[42] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

about  the  human  relationship  between  em- 
ployers and  employees  which  will  make  them  t 
colaborers  and  partners  and  fellow  workers./ 
The  point  I wish  to  make  is  that  the  world  is 
looking  to  America  to  set  the  standards  with 
regard  to  the  conditions  of  labor  and  the  rela- 
tions  between  labor  and  capital,  and  looking 
to  us  because  we  have  been  more  progressive 
than  other  nations  in  those  matters,  though 
sometimes  we  have  moved  very  slowly  and 
with  undue  caution.  As  a result  of  our  pro- 
gressiveness the  ruling  influences  among  our 
working  men  are  conservative  in  the  sense 
that  they  see  that  it  is  not  in  the  interest  of 
labor  to  break  up  civilization,  and  progressive 
in  the  sense  that  they  see  that  a constructive 
program  has  to  be  adopted.  We  must  devote 
our  national  genius  to  working  out  a method 
of  association  between  the  two  which  will 
make  this  Nation  the  nation  to  solve  trium- 
phantly and  for  all  time  the  fundamental 
problem  of  peaceful  production. 

You  ask,  “What  has  that  got  to  do  with  the 
League  of  Nations?”  I dare  say  you  do  not 
know  because  I have  never  heard  anyone  tell 
you  that  the  great  charter,  the  new  constitu- 
tional charter  of  labor  is  in  the  Treaty  of  peace 
and  associated  with  the  League  of  Nations.  A 
great  machinery  of  consultation  is  set  up 
there,  not  merely  about  international  politi- 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

cal  affairs,  but  about  standards  of  labor,  about 
the  relationships  between  managers  and  em- 
ployees, about  the  labor  of  women  and  of  chil- 
dren, about  the  humane  side  and  the  business 
side  of  the  whole  labor  problem. 


There  is  no  national  triumph  sought  to  be 
recorded  in  this  Treaty.  The  chief  thing  to 
notice  about  it  is  that  it  is  the  first  Treaty  ever 
made  by  the  great  powers  that  was  not  made 
in  their  own  favor.  There  is  no  glory  sought 
for  any  particular  nation.  The  fundamental 
^principle  of  this  Treaty  is  a principle  never  ac- 
knowledged before,  a principle  which  had  its 
birth  and  has  had  its  growth  in  this  country, 
that  the  countries  of  the  world  belong  to  the 
people  who  live  in  them,  and  that  they  have  a 
right  to  determine  their  own  destiny  and  their 
own  form  of  government,  and  their  own  poli- 
cy, and  that  no  body  of  statesmen,  sitting 
anywhere,  no  matter  whether  they  represent- 
ed the  overwhelming  physical  force  of  the 
world  or  not,  has  the  right  to  assign  any  great 
people  to  a sovereignty  under  which  it  does 
not  care  to  live.  For  the  first  time  in  the  his- 
tory of  civilized  society,  a great  international 
convention,  made  up  of  the  leading  statesmen 
of  the  world,  has  proposed  a settlement  which 
is  for  the  benefit  of  the  weak  and  not  for  the 


NO  NATIONAL  TRIUMPH^ 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

benefit  of  the  strong.  It  is  for  the  benefit  of 
peoples  who  could  not  have  liberated  them- 
selves, whose  weakness  was  profitable  to  the 
ambitious  and  imperialistic  nations,  whose 
weakness  had  been  traded  in  by  every  cabinet 
in  Europe;  and  yet  these  very  cabinets  repre- 
sented at  the  table  in  Paris,  were  unanimous 
in  the  conviction  that  the  peoples’  day  had 
come  and  that  it  was  not  their  right  to  dispose 
of  the  fortunes  of  people  without  the  consent 
of  these  people  themselves. 

This  Treaty  is  an  attempt  to  right  the  his- 
tory of  Europe.  The  heart  of  this  Treaty  is  not 
that  it  punishes  Germany — that  is  a tempo- 
rary thing — it  is  that  it  rectifies  the  age-long 
wrongs  which  characterized  the  history  of 
Europe.  This  is  a Treaty  not  merely  for  the  na- 
tions represented  at  the  peace  table  but  for 
the  people  who  were  the  subjects  of  govern- 
ments whose  wrongs  were  righted  on  the  fields 
of  France.  Insofar  as  the  scope  of  our  author- 
ity went,  we  rectified  the  wrongs  which  have 
been  the  fertile  source  of  war  in  Europe. 


NO  ANNEXATIONS/  j 

There  is  not  a single  act  of  annexation  in  this 
Treaty.  Every  other  international  arrange-'  " 'An. / 
ment  had  been  a division  of  spoils,  and  this  is  . 

an  absolute  renunciation  of  spoils.  Even  the 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

territories  that  are  taken  away  from  Germany, 
like  her  colonies,  are  not  given  to  anybody. 

When  we  turned  to  the  property  of  Ger- 
many, which  she  had  been  habitually  misgov- 
erning— I mean  the  German  colonies,  partic- 
ularly the  colonies  in  Africa — there  were  many 
nations  who  would  like  to  have  had  those  rich, 
undeveloped  portions  of  the  world;  but  none 
of  them  got  them.  We  adopted  the  principle 
of  trusteeship.  We  said,  “We  will  put  you  in 
charge  of  this,  that,  and  the  other  piece  of  ter- 
ritory, and  you  will  make  an  annual  report  to 
us.  We  will  deprive  you  of  your  trusteeship 
whenever  you  administer  it  in  a way  which  is 
not  approved  by  our  judgment,  and  we  will 
put  upon  you  this  primary  limitation,  that 
you  shall  do  nothing  that  is  to  the  detriment 
of  the  people  who  live  in  that  territory.  You 
shall  not  enforce  labor  on  it,  and  you  shall  ap- 
ply the  same  principles  of  humanity  to  the 
work  of  their  women  and  children  that  you 
apply  at  home.  You  shall  not  allow  men  who 
want  to  make  money  out  of  powder  and  shot 
to  sell  arms  and  ammunition  to  those  men 
who  can  use  them  to  their  own  disadvantage. 
You  shall  not  make  those  people  fight  in  your 
armies.  The  country  is  theirs,  and  you  must 
remember  that  and  treat  it  as  theirs. 

There  is  no  more  annexation.  There  is  no 
more  land  grabbing.  There  is  no  more  exten- 

[46] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

sion  of  sovereignty.  We  have  put  the  same 
safeguards,  and  as  adequate  safeguards, 
around  the  poor  naked  fellows  in  the  jungles 
of  Africa  that  we  have  around  those  poor  peo- 
ples almost  ready  to  assume  the  full  rights  of 
self  government  in  some  parts  of  the  Turkish 
Empire:  for  example  Armenia.  Armenia  is  one 
of  the  regions  that  are  to  be  under  trust  of  the 
League  of  Nations.  Armenia  is  to  be  redeemed. 
The  Turk  is  to  be  forbidden  to  exercise  au- 
thority there,  and  the  Christian  people  are 
not  only  to  be  allowed  to  aid  Armenia  but 
they  are  to  be  allowed  to  protect  Armenia.  At 
last  this  great  people,  struggling  through 
night  after  night  of  terror,  knowing  not  what 
day  would  see  their  land  stained  with  blood, 
are  now  given  a promise  of  safety,  a promise 
of  justice,  and  a possibility  that  they  may 
come  out  into  a time  when  they  can  enjoy 
their  own  rights  as  free  people,  as  they  never 
dreamed  they  would  be  able  to  exercise  them 
before.  The  principle  is  adopted  without  qual- 
ification upon  which  America  was  founded 
that  all  just  government  proceeds  from  the 
consent  of  the  governed. 

This  Treaty  is  a readjustment  of  all  those 
great  injustices  that  underlie  the  whole  struc- 
ture of  European  and  Asiatic  society.  Matters 
are  drawn  into  this  Treaty  which  affected  the 
peace  and  happiness  of  the  whole  continent  of 

[47] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

Europe,  and  not  of  the  continent  of  Europe 
merely,  but  of  forlorn  populations  in  Africa, 
of  peoples  that  we  hardly  know  about  in  Asia, 
in  the  Far  East,  and  everywhere  the  influ- 
ences of  German  policy  extended  and  every- 
where that  influence  had  to  be  corrected,  had 
to  be  checked,  had  to  be  altered.  The  heart  of 
the  Treaty  is  that  it  undoes  the  injustice  that 
Germany  did;  that  it  not  only  undoes  the  in- 
justice that  Germany  did  but  it  organizes  the 
world  to  see  that  such  injustice  will  in  the  fu- 
ture be  impossible. 

When  you  look  at  the  Treaty  of  Peace  with 
Germany  in  the  light  of  what  I have  been  say- 
ing to  you,  everything  else  is  put  in  a different 
light.  It  is  the  chart  and  constitution  of  a new 
system  for  the  world,  and  that  new  system  is 
based  upon  an  absolute  reversal  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  old  system.  ThisTreaty  contains 
the  things  that  America  believes  in.  This  is  one 
of  the  great  charters  of  human  liberty,  and 
^the  man  who  picks  flaws  in  it.  or.  rather,  picks 
out  the  flaws  that  are  in  it,  for  there  are  flaws 
in  it,  forgets  the  magnitude  of  the  thing,  for- 
gets the  majesty_x)Tthe  thing;,  forgets  that  the 
councils  of  more  than  twenty  nations  com- 
bined and  were  rendered  unanimous  in  the 
adoption  of  this  great  instrument.  This  set- 
tlement is  the  first  international  settlement 
that  was  intended  for  the  happiness  of  the 

[48  ] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

average  men  and  women  throughout  the 
world. 

America  in  this  Treaty  has  realized  what 
those  gallant  boys  we  are  so  proud  of  fought 
for.  Do  not  let  your  thoughts  dwell  too  con- 
stantly upon  Germany.  Germany  attempted 
this  outrageous  thing,  but  Germany  was  not 
the  only  country  that  had  ever  entertained 
the  purpose  of  subjecting  the  peoples  of  the 
world  to  its  will,  and  when  we  went  into  this 
war  we  said  that  we  sent  our  soldiers  across 
the  seas  not  because  we  thought  this  was  an 
American  fight  in  particular,  but  because  we 
knew  that  the  purpose  of  Germany  was  against 
liberty,  and  that  where  anybody  was  fighting 
liberty  it  was  our  duty  to  go  into  the  contest. 
We  set  this  Nation  up  with  the  profession 
that  we  wanted  to  set  an  example  of  liberty 
not  only,  but  to  lead  the  world  in  the  paths  of 
liberty  and  justice  and  of  right;  and  at  last, 
after  long  reflection,  after  long  hesitation,  af- 
ter trying  to  persuade  ourselves  that  this  was 
a European  war  and  nothing  more,  we  sud- 
denly looked  our  own  conscience  in  the  face 
and  said,  “This  is  not  merely  a European  war. 
This  is  a war  which  imperils  the  very  princi- 
ples for  which  this  Government  was  set  up, 
and  it  is  our  duty  to  lend  all  the  force  that  we 
have,  whether  of  men  or  of  resources,  to  the 
resistance  of  these  designs.”  And  it  was  Amer- 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

ica — never  let  anybody  forget  this — it  was 
America  that  saved  the  world,  and  those  who 
propose  the  rejection  of  the  Treaty  propose 
that,  after  having  redeemed  the  world,  we 
should  desert  the  world.  It  would  be  nothing 
les 

After  all  the  rest  of  the  world  has  signed  it, 
gentlemen  will  find  it  very  difficult  to  make 
any  other  kind  of  Treaty.  You  cannot  have 
any  other  treaty,  because  you  can  never  get 
H together  again  the  elements  that  agreed  to  this 
Treaty.  The  rejection  of  this  Treaty  means 
the  necessity  of  negotiating  a separate  treaty 
with  Germany.  A separate  peace  with  the 
Central  Powers  could  accomplish  nothing  but 
our  eternal  disgrace!  That  separate  treaty  be- 
tween Germany  and  the  United  States  could 
not  alter  any  sentence  in  this  Treaty.  It  could 
not  affect  the  validity  of  any  sentence  in  this 
yy  Treaty.  You  cannot  assemble  the  forces  again 
k (,ithat  were  back  of  it.  You  cannot  do  it  by  deal- 
^ ing  with  separate  governments.  You  cannot 
bring  the  agreement  upon  which  it  rests  into 
force  again.  It  was  the  laborious  work  of 
many,  many  months  of  the  most  intimate 
conference.  It  has  very,  very  few  compromises 
in  it,  and  is,  most  of  it,  laid  down  in  straight 
lines  according  to  American  specifications.  I 
hope  that  in  order  to  strengthen  this  impres- 
sion on  your  minds  that  you  will  take  the 

[50] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

pains  to  read  the  Treaty  of  peace.  A good  deal 
of  it  is  technical  and  you  could  skip  that  part, 
but  read  all  of  it  that  you  do  not  need  an  ex- 
pert to  advise  you  with  regard  to  the  meaning 
of.  The  economic  and  financial  clauses  which 
particularly  affect  the  settlements  with  Ger- 
many are,  I dare  say,  almost  unintelligible  to 
most  people,  but  you  do  not  have  to  under- 
stand them;  they  are  going  to  be  worked  out 
by  experts.  The  rest  of  it  is  going  to  be  worked 
out  by  the  experience  of  free  self-governed 
peoples.  I wish  you  would  get  a copy  of  it  and 
read  it.  If  you  will  not  take  the  pains  to  do 
that,  you  will  accept  the  interpretation  of 
those  who  made  it  and  know  what  the  inten- 
tions were  in  the  making  of  it. 

AMERICAN  EXPERTS 

At  the  peace  table  one  of  the  reasons  why 
American  advice  continually  prevailed,  as  it 
did,  was  that  our  experts,  our  financial  ex- 
perts, our  economic  experts,  and  all  the  rest  of 
us — for  you  must  remember  that  the  work  of 
the  conference  was  not  done  exclusively  by  the 
men  whose  names  you  all  read  about  every 
day;  it  was  done  by  the  most  intensive  labor 
of  experts  of  every  sort  who  sat  down  together 
and  got  down  to  the  hardpan  of  every  subject 
that  they  had  to  deal  with — were  known  to  be 
disinterested,  and  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten, 


K 


A* 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

,/  after  a long  series  of  debates  and  interchanges 
' ,Nof  views  and  counter-proposals,  it  was  usual- 
a ly  the  American  proposal  that  was  adopted. 
dr  That  was  because" the  American  expert sYame 

at  last  into  this  position  of  advantage,  they 
had  convinced  everybody  that  they  were  not 
trying  to  work  anything,  that  they  were  not 
thinking  of  something  that  they  did  not  dis- 
close, that  they  wanted  all  the  cards  on  the 
table,  and  that  they  wanted  to  deal  with  noth- 
ing but  facts.  They  were  not  dealing  with  na- 
tional ambitions,  they  were  not  trying  to  dis- 
appoint anybody,  and  they  were  not  trying  to 
stack  the  cards  for  anybody.  It  was  that  con- 
viction, and  that  only,  which  led  to  the  suc- 
cess of  American  counsel  in  Paris.1  Is  not 
that  a worthy  heritage  for  people  who  set 
up  a great  free  Nation  on  this  continent  in  or- 
der to  lead  men  in  the  ways  of  justice  and  of 
liberty! 

I think  I can  take  it  for  granted  that  you 
never  realized  before  what  a scope  this  great 
Treaty  has.  You  have  been  asked  to  look  at  so 
many  little  spots  in  it  with  a magnifying  glass 
that  you  did  not  know  how  big  it  is,  what  a 
great  enterprise  of  the  human  spirit  it  is,  and 
what  a thoroughly  American  document  it  is 
from  cover  to  cover.  It  is  astonishing  that  this 
great  document  did  not  come  as  a shock  upon 


^ee  Appendix  C. 


52 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

the  world.  If  the  world  had  not  already  been 
rent  by  the  great  struggle  which  preceded  this 
settlement,  men  would  have  stood  at  amaze 
at  such  a document  as  this.  It  is  the  most_re-jZ 
markable  document,  I venture  to  say,  in  hu- 
man history,  because  in  it  is  recorded  a com- 
plete reversal  of  the  processes  of  government 
which  had  gone  on  throughout  practically  the 
whole  history  of  mankind.  The  example  that 
we  set  in  1776,  which  some  statesmen  in 
Europe  affected  to  disregard  and  others  pre- 
sumed to  ridicule,  nevertheless  set  fires  going 
in  the  hearts  of  men  which  no  influence  was 
able  to  quench,  and  one  after  another  the  gov- 
ernments of  the  world  have  yielded  to  the  in- 
fluences of  Democracy.  And  there  came  a day 
at  Paris  when  the  representatives  of  all  the 
great  Governments  of  the  world  accepted  the 
American  specifications  upon  which  the  terms 
of  the  Treaty  of  Peace  were  drawn. 

The  choice  is  either  to  accept  this  Treaty  or 
to  play  a lone  hand.  What  does  that  mean? 
That  means  that  we  must  always  be  armed, 
that  we  must  always  be  ready  to  mobilize  the 
man  strength  and  the  manufacturing  resources 
of  the  country;  it  means  that  we  must  con- 
tinue to  live  under  not  diminishing  but  in-  I 
creasing  taxes;  it  means  that  we  shall  develop 
our  thought  and  the  organization  of  our  Gov- 
ernment to  being  strong  enough  to  beat  any 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

nation  in  the  world.  An  absolute  reversal  of 
all  the  ideals  of  American  history. 

If  you  are  going  to  play  a lone  hand,  the 
hand  that  you  play  must  be  upon  the  handle 
of  the  sword.  You  cannot  play  a lone  hand 
and  do  your  civil  business  except  with  the 
other  hand — one  hand  incidental  for  the  busi- 
ness of  peace,  and  the  other  hand  constantly 
for  the  assertion  of  force.  It  is  either  this 
Treaty  or  a lone  hand,  and  the  lone  hand  must 
have  a weapon  in  it.  The  weapon  must  be  all 
the  young  men  of  the  country  trained  to  arms, 
and  the  business  of  the  country  must  pay  the 
piper,  must  pay  for  the  whole  armament,  the 
arms  and  the  men. 

In  the  debate  of  this  great  document,  I 
think,  a great  many  things  that  we  talked 
about  at  first  have  cleared  away.  A great 
many  difficulties  which  were  at  first  discov- 
ered, or  which  some  fancied  that  they  had 
discovered,  have  been  removed.  The  center 
and  heart  of  this  document  is  that  great  in- 
strument which  is  placed  at  the  beginning  of 
it,  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations.  I 
think  everybody  now  understands  that  you 
cannot  work  this  Treaty  without  that  Cove- 
nant. Everybody  certainly  understands  that 
you  have  no  insurance  for  the  continuance  of 
this  settlement  without  the  Covenant  of  the 
League  of  Nations,  and  you  will  notice  that, 

[ 54] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

with  the  single  exception  of  the  provision  witFL" 
regard  to  the  transfer  of  the  German  rights  in  ! 
Shantung  in  China  to  Japan,  practically  noth-  1 
ing  in  the  body  of  the  Treaty  has  seemed  to 
constitute  any  great  obstacle  to  its  adoption. 
All  the  controversy,  all  the  talk,  hasxentered 
on  the  League  of  N ations,  and  I am  glad  to  see-  ^ 
the  issue  center;  I am  glad  to  see  the  issue 
clearly  drawn,  for  now  we  have  to  decide. 
Shall  we  stand  by  the  settlements  of  liberty 
or  shall  we  not?  The  representatives  of  all  the 
great  Governments  of  the  world  accepted  the 
American  specifications  upon  which  the  terms 
of  the  Treaty  of  Peace  were  drawn.  In  order  to 
carry  this  Treaty  out,itis  necessary  to  recon- 
struct Europe  economically  and  industrially. 

If  we  do  not  take  part  in  that  reconstruction, 
we  will  be  shut  out  from  it,  and  by  consequence 
the  markets  of  Europe  will  be  shut  to  us.  The 
combinations  of  European  governments  can 
be  formed  to  exclude  us  wherever  it  is  possible 
to  exclude  us;  and  if  you  want  to  come  to  the 
hard  and  ugly  basis  of  material  interest,  the 
United  States  will  everywhere  trade  at  an 
overwhelming  disadvantage  just  as  soon  as 
we  have  forfeited,  and  deserve  to  forfeit,  the 
confidence  of  the  world.  Shall  we  keep  the 
primacy  of  the  world,  or  shall  we  abandon  it? 
Shall  we  have  our  Treaty,  or  shall  we  have 
somebody  else’s?  It  is  an  absolute  reversal  of 
history,  an  absolute  revolution  in  the  way 

[55] 


THE  TREATY  OF  VERSAILLES 

in  which  international  affairs  are  treated, 
and  it  is  all  in  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of 
Nations. 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 


E have  shown  Germany — and  not  Ger- 


many only,  but  the  world — that  upon 
occasion  the  great  peoples  of  the  world  will 
combine  to  prevent  an  iniquity,  but  we  have 
not  shown  how  that  is  going  to  be  done  in  the 
future  with  a certainty  that  will  make  every 
other  nation  know  that  a similar  enterprise 
must  not  be  attempted. 

That  is  what  the  League  of  Nations  is  for — 
to  end  this  war  justly  and  then  not  merely  to 
--serve  notice  on  governments  which  would 
contemplate  the  same  things  that  Germany 
contemplated  that  they  will  do  it  at  their 
peril,  but  also  concerning  the  combination  of 
power  which  will  prove  to  them  they  will  do 
it  at  their  peril.  It  is  idle  to  say  the  world  will 
combine  against  you,  because  it  may  not,  but 
it  is  persuasive  to  say  the  world  is  combined 
against  you  and  will  remain  combined  against 
the  things  that  Germany  attempted. 

I want,  by  way  of  introduction  and  clarifi- 
cation, to  point  out  what  is  not  often  enough 
explained  in  this  country — the  actual  consti- 
tution of  the  League  of  Nations. 

If  you  will  be  generous  enough  to  read  some 
of  the  things  I say,  I hope  it  will  clarify  a 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

great  many  matters  which  have  been  very 
much  obscured  by  some  of  the  things  which 
have  been  said. 

I want  to  contrast  some  things  that  have 
been  said  with  the  real  facts. 

I want  to  give  you  a very  simple  account  of 
the  organization  of  the  League  of  Nations  and 
let  you  judge  for  yourselves. 

It  is  very  simply  constituted — -it  consists-of. 
twcybodieSj  a Council  and  an  Assembly. 

THE  COUNCIL 

There  is  the  Council,  which  consists  of_gng 
representative  from  each  of  the  principal  al- 
lied  and  associated  powers,  that  is  to  say,  the 
United  States,  Great  Britain,  France,  Italy 
and  Japan,  along  with  four  representatives  of 
smaller  powers  chosen  out  of  the  general  body 
7 of  the  membership  of  the  League.1 
mU  The  whole  direction  of  - the  ..action  of  th  e 
League  is  vested  in  the  Council.  The  Council 
is  the  onfy.par.L  of  the  organization  that  can 
■ take  effectivjL<rction.  Nothing  in  the  form  of 
an  active  measure,  no  policy,  no  recommenda- 
tion with  regard  to  the  action  of  the  govern- 
ments composing  the  League  can  proceed  ex- 
cept upon  a unanimous-vote  of  the  Council. 
Mark  you,  a unanimous  vote  of  the  Council. 

This  number  at  the  request  of  the  Council,  has  now  been  in- 
creased to  six  smaller  powers,  Belgium,  Brazil,  China,  Spain, 
Sweden  and  Uruguay. 


[58] 


PC-. 


- -V/I, 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

That  is  explicitly  stated  in  the  Covenant  itself.  ,, 

Does  it  not  evidently  follow  that  the  League 
of  Nations  can  adopt  no  policy  whatever,  f 
without  the  consent  of  the  United  States?  In 
brief,  inasmuch  as  the  United  States  is  to  be  a/ 
permanent  member  of  the  Council  of  the 
League,  the  League  can  take  no  step  whatever 
without  the  consent  of  the  United  States  of 
America.  We  are  so  safeguarded  that  the 
world  under  the  Covenant  cannot  do  a thing 
that  we  do  not  consent  to  being  done.  There  is 
not  a single  active  step  that  the  League  can 
take  unless  we  vote  aye.  Think  of  the  signifi- 
cance^ of  that!  Pf  Asz) 


/ . ' c'  ££-■' 


THE  ASSEMBLY 


The  Assembly  is  a debating  body.  The  Assem- 
bly is  the  numerous  body.  In  it  every,  self- 
go  verni  jig-  S ta te  that  is  a member  of  the 
League  is  represented,  and  not  only  the  self- 
governing,  independent  States,  but  the  self- 
governing  colonies  and  dominions,  such  as 
Canada,  New  Zealand,  Australia,  India  and 
South  Africa.  Each  member  of  the  Assembly 
has  three  representatives. 

The  Assembly  is,  so  to  say,  the  court  of  the 
pubhcxipinion  of  the  world.  It  is  where  you 
can  debate  anything  that  affects  the  peace  of 
the  world,  but  not  determine  upon  a course  of 
action  upon  anything  that  affects  the  peace  of 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 


the  world.  The  Assembly  is  the  talking  body. 
The  Assembly  was  created  in  order  that  any- 
body that  purposed  anything  wrong  should 
be  subjected  to  the  awkward  circumstance 
that  everybody  could  talk  about  it.  This  is 
the  great  assembly  in  which  all  the  things 
that  are  likely  to  disturb  the  peace  of  the 
world  or  the  good  understanding  between  na- 
tions are  to  be  exposed  to  the  general  view. 
The  voice  of  the  world  is  at  last  released.  The 
k conscience  of  the  world  is  at  last  given  a 
forum,  and  the  rights  of  men  not  liberated 
under  this  Treaty  are  given  a place  where 
they  can  be  heard.  If  there  are  nations  which 
wish  to  exercise  the  power  of  self-determina- 
tion but  are  not  liberated  by  this  Treaty,  they 
can  come  into  that  great  forum,  they  can 
point  out  how  their  demands  affect  the  peace 
and  quiet  of  the  world,  they  can  point  out 
how  their  demands  affect  the  good  under- 
standing between  nations. 

I There  is-a  forum  here  for  the  rights  of  man- 
j kind  which  was  never  dreamed  of  before,  and 
! in  that  forum  any  representative  has  the  right 
I to  speak  his  full  mind.  Never  before  has  this 
been  possible.  Never  before  has  there  been  a 
jury  of  mankind  to  which  nations  could  take 
their  causes,  whether  they  were  weak  or 
strong.  I am  amazed  that  so  many  men  do  not 
see  the  extraordinary  change  which  this  will 


[ 60  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS  , 

bring  in  the  transaction  of  human  affairs./ 1 

am  amazed  that  they  do  not  see  that  now,'  for 

the  first  time,  not  selfish  national  policy  but 

the  general  judgment  of  the  world  as  to  right 

is  going  to  determine  the  fortunes  of  peoples,  ' ’ '^/b^ 

whether  they  be  weak  or  whether  they  be 

strong. 

The  Assembly  is  not  a voting  body,  except  " 
upon  a limited  number  of  questions,  and  when- 
ever those  questions  are  questions  of  action, 
the  affirmative  vote  of  every  nation  repre- 
sented on  the  Council  is  indispensable.  In 
every  matter  in  which  the  Assembly  can  vote 
along  with  the  Council  it  is  necessary  that  all 
the  nations  represented  on  the  Council  should 
concur  in  the  affirmative  vote  to  make  it  valid, 
so  that  in  every  vote,  no  matter  how  many 
concur  in  it  in  the  Assembly,  in  order  for  it  to 
become  valid,  it  is  necessary  that  the  United 
States  should  vote  aye.  There  is  a very  lim- 
ited number  of  subjects  upon  which  it  can  act 
at  all,  and  I have  taken  the  pains  to  write 
them  down  here,  after  again  and  again  going 
through  the  Covenant  for  the  purpose  of  mak- 
ing sure  that  I had  not  omitted  anything,  in 
order  that  I might  give  you  an  explicit  ac- 
count of  the  thing.  There  are  two  matters  in 
which  the  Assembly  can  act,  but  I do  not 
think  we  will  be  jealous  of  them.  A majority 
of  the  Assembly  can  advise  a member  of  the 

[ 61  ] 


y 


fA 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

League  to  reconsider  any  treaty  which,  in  the 
opinion  of  the  Assembly  of  the  League,  is  apt 
to  conflict  with  the  operation  of  the  League 
itself,  but  that  is  advice  which  can  be  disre- 
garded, which  has  no  validity  of  action  in  it, 
which  has  no  compulsion  of  law  in  it.  There  is 
one  matter  upon  which  the  Assembly  can 
vote,  and  which  it  can  decide  by  a two-thirds 
majority  without  the  concurrence  of  all  the 
States  represented  in  the  council,  and  that  is 
the  admission  of  new  members  to  the  League. 

There  are  two  things  which  a majority  of 
the  Assembly  may  do.  Here  are  the  cases. 
When  the  Council  refers  a matter  in  dispute 
to  the  Assembly,  the  Assembly  can  decide  by 
a majority,  provided  all  the  representatives 
qf  the  nations  represented  in  the  Council  vote 
. ' on  the  side  of  the  majority.  In  case  of  an 
arnendment_to  the  Covenant  it  is  necessary 
that  there  should  be  a unanimous  vote  of  the 
representatives  of  the  nations  which  are  rep- 
resented in  the  Council  in  addition  to  a ma- 
jority vote  of  the  Assembly  itself.  In  the 
Assembly  as  in  the  Council,  any  single  nation 
that  is  a member  of  the  Council  has  a veto 
upon  active  conclusions,  and  there  is  all  the 
voting  that  the  Assembly  does. 

Everything  that  is  done  by  the  League  is 
formulated  and  passed  by  the  Cduncil  and  a 
unanimous  vote  is  required.  I share  with  all 

[62] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

my  fellow  countrymen  a very  great  jealousy 
with  regard  to  setting  up  any  power  that 
could  tell  us  to  do  anything  but  no  such  power 
is  set  up.  All  the  action,  all  the  energy,  all  the 
initiative  of  the  League  of  Nations  is  resident 
in  the  Council,  and  in  the  Council  a unanimous 
vote  is  necessary  for  action,  and  no  action  is 
possible  without  the  concurrent  vote  of  the 
United  States.  I cannot  understand  why,  hav- 
ing read  the  Covenant  of  the  League  and  ex- 
amined its  constitution,  they  are  not  satisfied 
with  the  fact  that  every  active  policy  of  the 
League  must  be  concurred  in  by  a unanimous 
vote  of  the  Council,  which  means  that  the  af- 
firmative vote  of  the  United  States  is  in  every 
instance  necessary. 

That  is  the  only  thing  that  seems  to  me 
weak  about  the  League,  I am  afraid  that  a 
unanimous  vote  will  sometimes  be  very  diffi- 
cult to  get.  The  danger  is  not  action,  but  in- 
action.  The  danger  is~not  that  they  will  do 
something  that  we  do  not  like,  but  that  upon 
some  critical  occasion  they  will  not  do  anv- 
thing.  That  may  sometimes,  I am  afraid,  im- 
pede the  action  of  the  Leagued  but  at  any 
rate,  it  makes  the  sovereignty  and  the  sover- 
eign choice  of  every  nation  that  is  a member 
of  the  League  absolutely  safe.  Every  other 
government,  big  or  little,  or  middle-sized, 
that  had  to  be  dealt  with  in  Paris,  was  just  as 

[63  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

jealous  of  its  sovereignty  as  the  United  States. 
The  only  difference  between  some  of  them 
and  us  is  that  we  can  take  care  of  our  own 
sovereignty  and  they  could  not  take  care  of 
theirs,  but  it  has  been  a matter  of  principle 
with  the  United  States  to  maintain  that  in 
respect  of  rights  there  was  and  should  be  no 
difference  between  a weak  state  and  a strong 
state.  Our  contention  has  always  been  in  in- 
ternational affairs,  that  we  should  deal  with 
them  upon  the  absolute  equality  of  indepen- 
dent sovereignty,  and  that  is  the  organization 
of  the  League. 

ONLY  FREE  GOVERNMENTS  ADMITTED 
Only  the  free_peoples  of  the  world  can  join 
the  League  of  Nations.  No  nation  is  admitted 
to  the  League  of  Nations  that  cannot  show 
that  it  has  the  institutions  which  we  call  free. 
No  autocratic  government  can  come  into  its 
membership,  no  government  which  is  not  con- 
trolled by  the  will  and  vote  of  its  people.  No- 
body is  admitted  except  the  self-governing 
nations,  because  it  was  the  instinctive  judg- 
ment of  every  man  who  sat  around  that  board 
that  only  a nation  whose  government  was  its 
servant  and  not  its  master  could  be  trusted  to 
preserve  the  peace  of  the  world.  It  is  a league 
of  free  independent  peoples  all  over  the  world 
and  when  that  great  arrangement  is  consum- 

[64] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

mated  there  is  not  going  to  be  a ruler  in  the 
world  that  does  not  take  his  advice  from  his 
people.  There  are  not  going  to  be  many  other 
kinds  of  nations  long.  The  people  of  this 
.world — not  merely  the  people  of  America,  for 
they  did  the  job  long  ago — have  determined 
that  there  shall  be  no  more  autocratic  gov- 
ernments.  The  Hapsburgs  and  the  Hohen- 
zollerns  are  permanently  out  of  business. 
They  are  out  of  date  because  this  Great  War 
with  its  triumphal  issue,  marks  a new  day  in 
the  history  of  the  world. 

MAINTENANCE  OF  WORLD  PEACE 

The  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations  is  the 
instrumentality  for  the  maintenance  of  peace. 
How  does  it  propose  to  maintain  it?  At  the 
heart  of  that  Covenant  there  are  these  tre- 
mendous arrangements — every  member  of 
the  League  solemnly  agrees,  that  means  all 
the  nations  of  the  world,  great  and  small,  that 
means  every  fighting  nation  in  the  world,  be- 
cause lor  the  present,  limited  to  an  army  of 
100,000,  Germany  is  not  a fighting  nation — 
that  it  will  never  go  to  war  without  first  hav- 
ing done  one  or  another  of  two  things:  with- 
out either  submitting  the  matter  in  dispute  to 
arbitration,  in  which  case  it  promises  abso- 
lutely to  abide  by  the  verdict,  or,  if  it  does  not 
care  to  submit  it  to  arbitration,  without  sub- 

[65] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

mitting  it  to  discussion  by  the  council  of  the 
League  of  Nations,  in  which  case  it  promises 
to  lay  all  the  documents  and  all  the  pertinent 
facts  before  that  Council;  it  consents  that  that 
Council  shall  publish  all  the  documents  and  all 
the  pertinent  facts,  so  that  all  the  world  shall 
know  them ; that  it  shall  be  allowed  six  months 
in  which  to  consider  the  matter;  and  that 
even  at  the  end  of  six  months,  if  the  decision 
of  the  Council  is  not  acceptable,  it  will  not  go 
to  war  for  three  months  following  the  render- 
ing of  the  decision.  So  that,  even  allowing  no 
time  for  preliminaries,  there  are  nine  months 
of  cooling  off,  nine  months  of  discussion,  nine 
months  not  of  private  discussion,  not  of  dis- 
cussion between  those  who  are  heated,  but  of 
discussion  between  those  who  are  disinter- 
ested except  in  the  maintenance  of  the  peace 
of  the  world  when  the  influence  of  the  public 
opinion  of  mankind  is  brought  to  bear  upon 
the  contests  That  is  the  central  principle  of 
some  thirty  treaties  entered  into  between  the 
United  States  of  America  and  some  thirty 
other  sovereign  nations,  all  of  which  were  con- 
firmed by  the  Senate  of  the  United  States. 
Any  nation  that  is  in  the  wrong  and  waits  nine 
months  before  it  goes  to  war  will  never  go  to 
f war.  No  nation  is  going  to  look  the  calm  judg- 
i ment  of  mankind  in  the  face  for  nine  months 
1 and  then  go  to  war! -If  anything  approaching 

[66] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

that  had  been  the  arrangement  of  the  world  in 
1914,  the  war  would  have  been  impossible; 
and  I confidently  predict  that  there  is  not  an 
aggressive  people  in  the  world  who  would  dare 
bring  a wrongful  purpose  to  that  jury.  It  is 
the  most  formidable  jury  in  the  world.  It  is 
not  only  a union  of  free  peoples  to  guarantee 
civilization;  it  is  something  more  than  that.  It 
is  a League  of  Nations  to  advance  civilization 
by  substituting  something  that  will  make  the 
improvement  of  civilization  possible. 

BOYCOTT 

If  any  member  of  the  League  breaks  or  ignores 
these  promises  with  regard  to  arbitration  and 
discussion,  what  happens?  War?  No,  not  war 
but  something  that  will  interest  them  and  en- 
gage them  very  much  more  than  war,  some- 
thing more  tremendous  than  war.  All  the  ar- 
gumentsyou  hear  are  based  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  we  are  all  going  to  break  the  Cove- 
nant; that  bad  faith  is  the  accepted  rule.  I 
repudiate  the  suggestion  which  underlies  some 
of  the  suggestions  I have  heard  that  the  other 
nations  of  the  world  are  acting  in  bad  faith 
and  that  only  the  United  States  is  acting  in 
good  faith.  It  is  not  true!  I can  testify  that  I 
was  cooperating  with  honorable  men  on  the 
other  side  of  the  water,  and  I challenge  any- 
body to  show  where  in  recent  years,  while  the 

[67] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

opinion  of  mankind  has  been  effective,  there 
has  been  the  repudiation  of  an  international 
obligation  by  France,  or  Italy,  or  Great  Brit- 
ain or  by  Japan. 

I was  glad  after  I inaugurated  it  that  I 
drew  together  the  little  body  which  was  called 
“the  big  four.”  We  did  not  call  it  the  “Big 
Four”;  we  called  it  something  very  much 
bigger  than  that.  We  called  it  the  Supreme 
Council  of  the  Principal  and  Allied  and  Asso- 
ciated Powers.  We  had  to  have  some  name 
and  the  more  dramatic  it  was  the  better;  but 
it  was  a very  simple  council  of  friends.  The  in- 
timacies of  that  little  room  were  the  center  of 
the  whole  Peace  Cconference,  and  they  were 
the  intimacies  of  men  who  believed  in  the 
same  things  and  sought  the  same  objects.  The 
hearts  of  men  like  Clemenceau  and  Lloyd- 
George  and  Orlando  beat  with  the  people  of 
the  world  as  well  as  with  the  people  of  their 
own  countries.  They  have  the  same  funda- 
mental sympathies  that  we  have  and  they 
know  that  there  is  only  one  way  to  work  out 
peace  and  that  is  to  work  it  out  right.  There 
has  not  been  any  such  bad  faith  among  na- 
tions in  recent  times  except  the  flagrant  bad 
faith  of  the  nation  we  have  just  been  fighting, 
and  that  bad  faith  is  not  likely  to  be  repeated 
in  the  immediate  future. 

Suppose  somebody-does  -not  aFide-by  those 

[68  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

engagements,  then  what  happens?  An  abso- 
iuteisoIaHQn,. a boycott ! The  boycott  is  auto- 
matic. There  is  no  “if”  or  “but”  about  that  in 
the  Covenant.  It  is  provided  in  the  Covenant 
that  any  nation  that  disregards  these  solemn 
promises  with  regard  to  arbitration  and  dis- 
cussion shall  be  thereby  deemed  “ipso  facto” 
to  have  committed  an  act  of  war  against  the 
other  members  of  the  League,  and  that  there 
shall  thereupon  follow  an  absolute  exclusion 
of  that  nation  from  communication  of  any 
kind  with  the  members  of  the  League.  When 
you  consider  that  the  League  is  going  to  con- 
sist of  every  considerable  nation  in  the  world, 
except  Germany — you  can  see  what  the  boy- 
cott will  mean.  No  goods  can  be  shipped  in 
or  out,  no  telegraphic  messages  can  be  ex- 
changed, except  through  the  elusive  wireless 
perhaps;  there  shall  be  no  communication  of 
any  kind  between  the  people  of  the  other  na- 
tions and  the  people  of  that  nation.  The  na- 
tionals, the  citizens  of  the  member  states  will 
never  enter  their  territory,  until  the  matter  is 
adjusted,  and  their  citizens  cannot  leave  their 
territory.  It  is  the  most  complete  boycott 
ever  conceived  in  a public  document;  and  \ 
want  to  ^^v  with  confident  prediction  that  ^ • sinre. 

is  not  a nation  that  can  stand  that  for  six 
months.  Germany  could  have  faced  the  armies 


[ 69] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

of  the  world  more  readily  than  she  faced  the 
boycott  of  the  world.  Germany  felt  the  pinch 
of  the  blockade  more  than  she  felt  the  stress 
of  the  blow;  and  there  is  not,  so  far  as  I know, 
a single  European  country — I say  European, 
because  I think  our  own  country  is  an  excep- 
tion—which  is  not  dependent  upon  some 
other  part  of  the  world  for  some  of  the  neces- 
saries of  its  life.  There  is  not  a nation  in 
Europe  that  can  live  for  six  months  without 
importing  goods  out  of  other  countries.  Some 
of  them  are  absolutely  dependent,  some  are 
without  the  raw  materials  practically  of  any 
kind,  some  of  them  are  absolutely  without 
fuel  of  any  kind,  either  coal  or  oil;  almost  all 
of  them  are  without  that  variety  of  supply  of 
ores  which  are  necessary  to  modern  industry 
and  necessary  to  the  manufacture  of  muni- 
tions of  war. 

I want  you  to  realize  that  this  war  was  won 
not  only  by  the  armies  of  the  world.  It  was 
won  by  economic  means  as  well.  Without  the 
economic  means  the  war  would  have  been 
much  longer  continued.  What  happened  was 
that  Germany  was  shut  off  from  the  economic 
resources  of  the  globe  and  she  could  not  stand 
it.  What  brought  Germany  to  her  knees  was 
not  only  the  splendid  fighting  of  the  incom- 
parable men  who  met  her  armies,  but  it  was 
that  her  doors  were  locked  and  she  could  not 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

get  supplies  from  any  part  of  the  world.  There 
were  a few  doors  open,  to  some  Swedish  ore 
for  example,  that  she  needed  for  making  mu- 
nitions, and  that  kept  her  going  for  a time, 
but  the  Swedish  door  would  be  shut  this  time. 
There  would  not  be  any  door  open;  and  that 
brings  a nation  to  its  senses  just  as  suffocation 
removes  from  the  individual  all  inclinations 
to  fight.  A nation  that  is  boycotted  is  a nation 
that  is  in  sight  of  surrender.  Apply  this  eco- 
nomic, peaceful,  silent,  deadly  remedy  and 
there  will  be  no  need  for  force.  It  is  a terrible 
remedy.  It  does  not  cost  a life  outside  of 


nation  boycotted,  but  it  brings  a pressure 
upon  that  nation  which,  in  my  judgment,  no 
modern  nation  could  resist. 

If  this  economic  boycott  bears  with  unequal 
weight  the  members  of  the  League  agree  to 
support  one  another  and  to  relieve  one  anoth- 
er in  any  exceptional  disadvantages  that  may 
arise  out  of  it.  When  you  apply  that  boycott, 
you  have  got  your  hand  upon  the  throat  of  the 
offending  nation,  and  it  is  a proper  punish- 
ment. It  is  an  exclusion  from  civilized  society. 
That  is  the  remedy  that  thoughtful  men  have 
advocated  for  several  generations.  They  have 
thought,  and  thought  truly,  that  war  was  bar- 
barous and  that  a nation  that  resorted  to  war 
when  its  cause  was  unjust  was  unworthy  of 
being  consorted  with  by  free  people  anywhere. 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

The  boycott  is  an  infinitely  more  terrible 
instrument  of  war.  The  minute  you  lock  the 
door,  then  the  pinch  of  the  thing  becomes  in- 
tolerable; not  only  the  physical  pinch,  not 
only  the  fact  that  you  cannot  get  raw  materi- 
als and  must  stop  your  factories,  not  only  the 
fact  that  you  cannot  get  credit  is  stopped, 
that  your  assets  are  useless,  but  the  still  great- 
er pinch  that  comes  when  a nation  knows  that 
it  is  sent  to  Coventry  and  despised.  To  be  put 
in  jail  is  not  the  most  terrible  punishment 
that  happens  to  a condemned  man;  if  he 
knows  that  he  was  justly  condemned,  what 
penetrates  his  heart  is  the  look  in  other  men’s 
eyes.  It  is  the  soul  that  is  wounded  much 
more  poignantly  than  the  body,  and  one  of 
the  things  that  the  German  nation  has  not 
been  able  to  comprehend  is  that  it  has  lost  for 
the  time  being,  the  respect  of  mankind;  and 
as  Germans,  when  the  doors  of  truth  were 
opened  to  them  after  the  war,  have  begun  to 
realize  that,  they  have  begun  to  look  aghast  at 
the  probable  fortunes  of  Germany,  for  if  the 
world  does  not  trust  them,  if  the  world  does 
not  respect  them,  if  the  world  does  not  want 
Germans  to  come  as  immigrants  any  more, 
what  is  Germany  to  do?  The  boycott  is  what 
is  substituted  for  war. 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS  ^ 

OBJECTIONS  ANALYZED 

Your  attention  is  called  to  certain  features  of 
this  League.  I want  to  discuss  with  you  very 
frankly,  indeed  just  as  frankly  as  I know  how, 
the  difficulties  that  have  been  suggested,  to 
analyze  the  objections  which  are  made  to  this 
great  League.  You  have  heard,  I dare  say, 
only  about  four  things  in  the  Covenant  of  the 
League  of  Nations,  the  chance  to  get  out,  the 
dangers  of  Article  Ten,  theMonroe  Doctrine^ 
and  the.risk  that  other  nations  may  interfere 
in  our  domestic  affairs.  I want  very  briefly  to 
take  these  things  in  their  sequence. 

When  this  Covenant  was  drawn  up  in  its 
first  form,  I had  occasion  to  return  to  this 
country  for  a week  or  so.  I brought  the  Cove- 
nant in  its  first  draft.  I then  invited  the  For- 
eign Affairs  Committee  of  the  Llouse,  and  the 
Foreign  Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate 
to  the  White  House  to  dinner,  and  after  din- 
ner we  had  the  frankest  possible  conference 
with  regard  to  this  draft,  of  every  portion 
that  they  wished  to  discuss.  They  made  cer- 
tain specific  suggestions  as  to  what  should  be 
contained  in  this  document  when  it  was  re- 
vised. When  I went  back  to  Paris  I carried 
every  suggestion  that  was  made  in  that  con- 
ference to  the  commission  on  the  League  of 
Nations,  which  consisted  of  representatives  of  & 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

fourteen  nations,  and  everyone  of  the  sugges- 
tions of  those  committees  was  embodied  in 
the  Covenant.  What  more  could  I have  done? 
What  more  could  have  been  obtained  ? There 
is  a very  true  sense  in  which  I can  say  this  is  a 
tested  American  document. 

THE  RIGHT  TO  WITHDRAW 

The  members  of  the  Foreign  Relations  Com- 
mittee and  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Af- 
fairs did  not  see  it  anywhere  explicitly  stated 
in  the  Covenant  that  a member  of  the  League 
could  withdraw.  That  did  not  seem  to  me  a 
handsome,. thing  to  propose,  and  I told  the 
men  In  the  conference  at  the  White  House, 
when  they  raised  the  question,  that  it  had 
been  raised  in  the  commission  on  the  League 
of  Nations,  and  that  it  was  the  unanimous 
opinion  of  the  international  lawyers  of  that 
body,  that,  inasmuch  as  this  was  an  associa- 
tion of  sovereigns,  any  sovereign  had  the  right 
to  withdraw  from  it;  but  I conceded  that  if 
that  right  was  admitted  there  could  be  no 
harm  in  stating  it.  They  proposed  that  it 
should  be  explicitly  stated  that  any  member 
of  the  League  should  have  the  right  to  with- 
draw. I carried  that  suggestion  back  to  Paris, 
and  without  the  slightest  hesitation  it  was  ac- 
cepted and  acted  upon  and  so  in  the  present 
draft  of  the  Covenant,  and  at  the  suggestion 

[ 74  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

of  the  United  States,  it  is  stated  that  any 
member  may  withdraw  ypon  two  years’  no- 
tice*- which  I think  is  not  an  unreasonable 
length  of  time.  Provision  was  made  that  two 
year’s  notice  should  be  given,  so  that  no  na- 
tion is  at  liberty  suddenly  to  break  down  this 
thing  upon  which  the  hope  of  mankind  rests. 

The  gentlemen  who  discuss  this  thing  do 
not  object  to  the  two  years’  notice;  they  say, 
“It  says  that  you  can  get  out  after  two  years’ 
notice  if^a t that  time  you  have  fulfilled  your 
international  obligationsT’  and  They  are 
afraid  that  somebody  will  have  the  right  to 
saj  they  have  not.  That  right  cannot  belong 
to  anybody  unless  you  give  it  to  somebody, 
and  the  Covenant  of  the  League  does  not  give 
fit  to  anybodyTThis  Covenant  does  not  set  up 
any  ' tribunal  to  judge  whether  we  have  ful- 
filled our  obligations  at  that  time  or  not. 
There  is  no  judge  in  the  matter  set  up  in  the 
Covenant.  It  is  absolutely  left  to  the  con- 
science of  this  nation,  as  to  the  conscience  of 
every  other  member  of  the  League,  to  deter- 
mine whether  at  the  time  of  its  withdrawal  it 
has  fulfilled  its  international  obligations  or 
not. 

Are  you  afraid  that  we  will  not  have  ful- 
filled our  international  obligations?  There  is 
only  one  thing  to  restrain  us  and  that  is  the 
opinion  of  mankind.  Would  you  wish  any 


[ 75  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

other  condition?  Would  you  wish  the  United  J 
States  allowed  to  withdraw  without  fulfilling 
its  obligations?  Is  that  the  kind  of  people  we 
are  ? The  only  thing  that  can  ever  keep  you  in 
the  League  is  being  ashamed  to  get  out.  You 
can  get  out  whenever  you  want  to  after  two 
years’  notice  and  the  only  risk  you  run  is  hav- 
ing the  rest  of  the  world  think  you  ought  not 
to  have  gotten  out.  In  as  much  as  we  have  al- 
ways scrupulously  satisfied  the  public  opinion 
of  mankind  with  regard  to  justice  and  right  I 
for  my  part,  am  not  afraid  at  any  time  to  go 
before  that  jury.  It  is  a jury  that  might  con- 
demn us  if  we  did  wrong,  but  it  is  not  a jury 
' that  could  oblige  us  to  stay  in  the  League,  so 
there  is  absolutely  no  limitation  upon  our 
right  to  withdraw,-  

ARTICLE  TF.N  • 

Then  comes  Article  Ten,  for  I am  taking  the 
questions  in  the  order  in  which  they  come  in 
the  Covenant  itself. 

Article  Ten  is  an  engagement  of  the  most 
extraordinary  kind  in  history.  It  is  an  engage- 
ment by  all  the  fighting  nations  of  the  world 
never  to  fight  upon  the  plan  upon  which  they 
always  fought  before. 

There  is  nothing  in  Article  Ten  that  can 
oblige  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  to  de- 
clare war  if  it  does  not  deem  it  wise  to  declare 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

war — and  in  case  Congress  is  right  I am  indif- 
ferent to  foreign  opinion. 

There  is,  however,  something  in  Article  Ten 
that  you  ought  to  realize  and  ought  to  accept 
or  reject.  Anybody  who  proposes  to  cut  out 
Article  Ten,  proposes  to  cut  out  all  the  sup- 
ports from  under  the  peace  and  security  of  the 
world,  and  we  must  face  the  question  in  that 
light;  we  must  draw  the  issue  as  sharply  as 
that;  we  must  see  it  through  as  distinctly  as 
that.  Article  Ten,  whether  you  want  to  as- 
sume the  responsibility  of  it  or  not,  is  the 
heart  of  the  pledge  that  we  have  made  to  the 
other  nations  of  the  world.  Article  Ten  is  the 
article  that  goes  to  the  heart  of  this  whole  bad 
business,  for  that  article  says  that  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Teague — that  is  intended  to  be  all 
the  great  nations  of  the  world — engage,  to 
respect  and 'to  preserve  against  all  external 
aggression  theterntoriallntegritv  and  politi- 
c aljn dep e n dene e oFthe  nations  concerned. 

We  are  partners  with  the  rest  of  the  world 
in  respecting  the  territorial  integrity  and  po- 
litical independence  of  others.  Only  by  that 
article  can  we  be  said  to  have  underwritten 
civilization.  America  alone  cannot  underwrite 
civilization.  All  the  great  free  peoples  of  the 
world  must  underwrite  it.  We  engage  in  the 
first  sentence  of  Article  Ten  to  respect  and 
preserve  from  external  aggression  the  terri- 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

torial  integrity  and  the  existing  political  inde- 
pendence not  only  of  the  other  states,  but  of 
all  states,  and  if  any  member  of  the  League 
disregards  that  promise,  what  happens?  The 
second  sentence  provides  that  in  case  of  neces- 
sity the  council  of  the  League  shall  advise 
what  steps  are  necessary  to  carry  out  the  ob-. 
ligations  of  that  promise;  that  is  to  say,  what 
force  is  necessary  if  anyi,  The  second  sentence 
of  Article  Ten  is  that  the  Council  shall  advise 
as  to  the  method  of  fulfilling  this  guarantee, 
that  the  Council  which  must  vote  by  unani- 
mous vote,  must  advise — cannot  direct — 
what  is  to  be  done  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
honor  of  its  members  and  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  peace  of  the  world.  Is  there  anything 
that  can  frighten  a man  or  a woman  or  a child 
with  just  thought  or  red  blood,  in  those  pro- 
visions? 

Do  you  think  the  United  States  is  likely  to 
seize  somebody  else’s  territory?  Do  you  think 
the  United  States  is  likely  to  disregard  the 
first  sentence  of  the  article?  The  Council  of 
the  League  advises  what  should  be  done  to 
enforce  the  respect  for  that  Covenant  on  the 
part  of  the  nation  attempting  to  violate  it.  It 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Council  to  advise,  not 
to  direct.  Some  gentlemen  who  doubt  the 
meaning  of  English  words  have  thought  that 
advice  did  not  mean  advice  but  I do  not  know 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

anything  else  that  it  does  mean.  I have  in  vain 
searched  the  dictionary  to  find  any  other 
meaning  for  the  word  “advise”  than  “advise.” 
I can  testify  from  having  sat  at  the  board 
where  the  instrument  was  drawn  that  advice 
means  advice.  You  would  think  from  some  of 
the  discussions  that  the  emphasis  is  on  the 
word  “preserve.”  The  solemn  thing  about  Ar- 
ticle Ten  is  the  first  sentence,  not  the  second. 

By  guaranteeing  the  territorial  integrity  of 
a country  you  do  not  mean  that  you  guaran- 
tee it  against  invasion.  You  guarantee  it 
against  the  invader  staying  there  and  keeping 
the  spoils.  Territorial  integrity  does  not  mean 
that  you  cannot  invade  another  country;  it 
means  that  you  cannot  invade  it  and  stay 
tKere^)  1 have  not  impaired  the  territorial 
integrity  of  your  back  yard  if  I walk  into  it, 
but  I very  much  impair  it  if  I insist  upon  stay- 
ing there  and  will  not  get  out,  and  the  impair- 
ment of  integrity  contemplated  in  this  article 
is  the  kind  of  impairment  as  the  seizure  of  ter- 
ritory, as  an  attempt  at  annexation,  as  an  at- 
tempt at  continuing  domination  either  of  the 
territory  itself  or  of  the  methods  of  govern- 
ment inside  that  territory. 

This  does  not  guarantee  any  country,  any 
government  against  an  attempt  on  the  part 
of  its  subjects  to  throw  off  its  authority.  It 
does  not  stop  the  right  of  revolution.  It  does 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

not  stop  the  choice  of  self-determination.  No 
nation  promises  to  protect  any  government 
against  the  wishes  and  actions  of  its  own  peo- 
ples or  of  any  portion  of  its  own  people.  The 
United  States  could  not  keep  its  countenance 
and  make  a promise  like  that,  because  it  be- 
gan by  doing  that  very  thing.  She  threw  off 
the  yoke  of  a government.  Shall  we  prevent 
other  people  from  throwing  off  the  yoke  that 
they  are  unwilling  to  bear?  The  glory  of  the 
United  States  is  that  when  we  were  a little 
body  of  3,000,000  people  strung  along  the  At- 
lantic coast  we  threw  off  the  power  of  a great 
empire  because  it  was  not  a power  chosen  by 
or  consented  to  by  ourselves.  We  hold  that 
principle.  We  never  will  guarantee  any  gov- 
ernment against  the  exercise  of  that  right,  and 
no  suggestion  was  made  in  the  conference  that 
we  should.  We  merely  ourselves  promised  to 
respect  the  territorial  integrity  and  existing 
political  independence  of  the  other  members 
of  the  League  and  to  assist  in  preserving  them 
against  external  aggression. 

Do  not  let  anybody  persuade  you  that  you 
can  take  that  article  out  and  have  a peaceful 
world.  That  promise  is  necessary  in  order  to 
prevent  this  sort  of  war  from  recurring,  and 
we  are  absolutely  discredited  if  we  fought  this 
war  and  then  neglect  the  essential  safeguards 
-against  it.  All  the  great  wrongs  of  the  world 

[ 80  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

have  had  their  root  in  the  seizure  of  territory 
or  the  control  of  the  political  independence  of 
other  peoples.  Without  that  clause  the  heart 
of  the  recent  war  is  not  cut  out.  The  heart  of 
the  recent  war  was  an  absolute  disregard  of 
the  territorial  integrity  and  political  indepen- 
dence of  the  smaller  nations.  If  you  do  not 
cut  the  heart  of  the  war  out,  that  heart  is 
going  to  live  and  beat  and  grow  stronger  and 
we  will  have  the  cataclysm  again.  That  cuts 
at  the  root  of  the  outrage  against  Belgium. 
That  cuts  at  the  root  of  the  outrage  against 
France.  Article  Ten  cuts  at  the  very  heart, 
and  is  the  only  instrument  that  will  cut  at  the 
very  heart,  of  the  old  system. 

For  every  other  nation  than  Germany,  in 
1 9 14,  treaties  stood  as  solemn  and  respected 
covenants.  For  Germany  they  were  scraps  of 
paper,  and  when  her  first  soldier’s  foot  fell 
upon  the  soil  of  Belgium  her  honor  was  for- 
feited. That  act  of  aggression,  that  failure  to 
respect  the  territorial  integrity  of  a nation 
whose  territory  she  was  specially  bound  to 
respect,  pointed  the  hand  along  that  road 
that  is  strewn  with  graves  since  the  beginning 
of  history,  that  road  made  red  and  ugly  with 
the  strife  behind  which  lies  a disregard  for  the 
rights  of  others  and  a thought  concentrated 
upon  what  you  want  and  mean  to  get.  That  is 
the  heart  of  war,  and  unless  you  accept  Arti- 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

cle  Ten  you  do  not  cut  the  heart  of  war  out  of 
civilization.  Article  Ten  is  the  test  of  the 
honor  and  courage  and  endurance  of  the 
world.  When  you  read  Article  Ten,  therefore, 
you  will  see  that  it  is  nothing  but  the  inevit- 
able, logical  center  of  the  whole  system  of  the 
Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations,  and  I 
stand  for  it  absolutely.  If  it  should  ever  in  any 
important  respect  be  impaired,  the  glory  of 
the  armies  and  the  navies  of  the  United  States 
is  gone  like  a dream  in  the  night,  and  there 
ensues  upon  it,  the  nightmare  of  dread  which 
lay  upon  the  nations  before  this  war  came; 
and  there  will  come  sometime,  in  the  vengeful 
Providence  of  God,  another  struggle  in  which, 
not  a few  hundred  thousand  fine  men  from 
America  will  have  to  die,  but  as  many  millions 
as  are  necessary  to  accomplish  the  final  free- 
dom of  the  peoples  of  the  world. 

ORDERING  OUR  ARMIES  ABROAD 

Gentlemen  would  have  you  believe  that  our 
armies  can  be  ordered  abroad  by  some  other 
power  or  by  a combination  of  powers.  Amer- 
ica is  not  the  only  proud  nation  in  the  world. 
I can  testify  from  my  share  in  the  counsels  on 
the  other  side  of  the  sea  that  the  other  na- 
tions are  just  as  jealous  of  their  sovereignty  as 
we  are  of  ours.  They  would  no  more  have 
dreamed  of  giving  us  the  right  of  ordering  out 

[ 82] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

their  armies  than  we  would  have  dreamed  of 
giving  them  the  right  to  order  out  our  armies. 

The  advice  cannot  be  given  without  a unani- 
mous vote  of  the  Council  of  the  League.  Arti- 
cle Ten  has  no  operative  force  in  it  unless  we 
vote  that  it  shall  operate.  The  member  of  the 
Council  representing  the  United  States  has  to 
vote  “aye”  before  the  United  States  or  any 
other  country  can  be  advised  to  go  to  war  un- 
der that  agreement,  unless  the  United  States 
is  herself  a party. 

What  does  that  mean?  A party  to  what?  A 
party  to  seizing  somebody  else’s  territory?  A ' 
party  to  infringing  some  other  country’s  po- 
litical independence?  I challenge  any  man  to 
stand  up  before  an  American  audience  and  \ 
say  that  that  is  the  danger.  Ah,  but  somebody 
else  may  seek  to  seize  our  territory  or  impair 
our  political  independence.  Well,  who?  In 
looking  about  me  I do  not  see  anybody  that 
would  think  it  wise  to  try  it  on  us.  Who  has 
an  arm  long  enough,  who  has  an  audacity 
great  enough  to  try  to  take  a single  inch  of  ,C 
American  territory  or  to  seek  to  interfere  for  N . :r 
one  moment  with  the  political  independence  / ,G 
of  the  United  States  ? But  suppose  we  are  par-  f , 
ties;  then  is  it  the  council  of  the  League  that  V ' 
is  forcing  war  upon  us  ? The  war  is  ours  any- 
how. We  are  in  circumstances  where  it  is  nec- 
essary for  Congress,  if  it  wants  to  steal  some- 

[83] 


I 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

body’s  territory  or  prevent  somebody  from 
stealing  our  territory  to  go  to  war.  It  is  not 
the  Council  of  the  League  that  brings  us  into 
war  at  that  time,  in  such  circumstances.  It  is 
the  unfortunate  circumstances  which  have 
arisen  in  some  matter  of  aggression.  Then  the 
war  is  ours  anyhow.  If  we  are  a party  we  are 
in  trouble  already,  and  if  we  are  not  a party 
we  can  control  the  advice  of  the  Council  by 
our  own  vote. 

There  is  no  compulsion  upon  us  to  take  that 
advice  except  the  compulsion  of  our  good  con- 
science and  judgment.  So  that  it  is  perfectly 
evident  that  if,  in  the  judgment  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States  the  Council  adjudged 
wrong  and  that  this  is  not  a case  of  the  use  of 
force,  there  would  be  no  necessity  on  the  part 
of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  to  vote 
the  use  of  force.  But  let  us  suppose  that  it 
means  something  else;  let  us  suppose  thereds*”" 
some  legal  compulsion  behind  that  advice. 
There  could  be  no  advice  of  the  Council  on  any 
subject  without  a unanimous  vote,  and  the 
unanimous  vote  includes  our  own,  and  if  we 
accepted  the  advice  we  would  be  accepting 
our  own  advice,  for  I need  not  tell  you  the 
representatives  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  would  not  vote  without  in- 
structions from  their  government  at  home, 
and  what  we  united  in  advising  we  could  be 

[ 84] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 


certain  that  the  American  people  would  de- 
sire to  do.  I am  not  afraid  of  advice  we  give 
ourselves.  There  is  in  that  Covenant  not  only 
not  a surrender  of  the  independent  judgment 
of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  but 
an  expression  of  it  because  that  independent 
judgment  would  have  to  join  with  the  judg- 
ment of  the  rest.  Whether  we  use  it  wisely  or' 
unwisely,  we  can  use  the  vote  of  the  United 
States  to  make  impossible  drawing  the  Uni- 
ted States  into  any  enterprise  that  she  does 
not  care  to  be  drawn  into. 

We  are  free  to  exercise  it  in  two  stages.  We 
are  free  to  exercise  it  in  the  vote  of  our  repre- 
sentative on  the  Council,  who  will,  of  course, 
act  under  instructions  from  the  home  govern- 
ment; and  in  the  second  place,  we  are  to  exer- 
cise it  when  the  President,  acting  upon  the  ac- 
tion of  the  Council,  makes  his  recommenda- 
tions to  Congress.  Then  the  Congress  is  to  ex- 
ercise its  judgment  as  to  whether  the  instruc- 
tions of  the  Executive  to  our  member  of  the 
Council  were  well  founded  or  not,  and  whether 
this  is  a case  of  distinct  moral  obligation.  The 
men  who  were  discussing  these  very  impor- 
tant matters  were  all  of  the  time  aware  that 
it  would  depend  upon  the  approving  or  disap- 
proving state  of  opinion  of  their  countries 
how  their  representatives  in  the  Council  would 
vote  in  matters  of  this  sort.  It  is  inconceivable 


[ 85  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

to  me  that  unless  the  opinion  of  the  United 
States,  the  moral  and  practical  judgments  of 
the  people  of  the  United  States  approved,  the 
representatives  of  the  United  States  on  the 
Council  should  vote  any  such  advice  as  would 
lead  us  into  war. 

Nothing  could  have  been  made  more  clear 
to  the  Conference  than  the  right  of  our  Con- 
gress under  our  Constitution  to  exercise  its  in- 
dependent judgment  in  all  matters  of  peace 
and  war.  No  attempt  was  made  to  question 
that  right.  There  is  no  sacrifice  in  the  slightest 
degree  of  the  independent  choice  of  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States  whether  it  will  de- 
clare war  or  not.  The  United  States  will  in- 
deed undertake,  under  Article  Ten,  to  “re- 
spect and  preserve  as  against  external  aggres- 
sion the  territorial  integrity  and  existing  po- 
litical independence  of  all  members  of  the 
League,”  and  that  engagement  constitutes  a 
very  grave  and  solemn  moral  obligation.  But 
it  is  a moral,  not  a legal  obligation,  and  leaves 
our  Congress  absolutely  free  to  put  its  own 
interpretations  upon  it  in  all  cases  that  call 
for  action.  In  other  words  it  is  an  attitude  of 
comradeship  and  protection  among  the  mem- 
bers of  the  League  which  in  its  very  nature  is 
moral  and  not  legal.  In  every  moral  obliga- 
tion there  is  an  element  of  judgment.  In  a 
legal  obligation  there  is  no  element  of  judg- 

[86] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

ment.  It  is  binding  in  conscience  only,  not  in 
law;  so  that  any  way  you  turn  Article  Ten,  it 
does  not  alter  in  the  least  degree  the  freedom 
and  independence  of  the  United  States  with 
regard  to  its  action  in  respect  of  war.  The 
United  States  cannot  be  drawn  into  anything 
it  does  not  wish  to  be  drawn  into,  but  the 
United  States  ought  not  to  be  itself  in  the 
position  of  saying,  “You  need  not  expect  of  us 
that  we  assume  the  same  moral  obligations 
that  you  assume.  You  need  not  expect  of  us 
that  we  will  respect  and  preserve  the  terri- 
torial integrity  and  political  independence  of 
other  nations.” 


PROTECTING  THE  PHILIPPINES 

We  have  a problem  ahead  of  us  that  ought 
to  interest  us  in  this  connection.  We  have 
promised  the  people  of  the  Philippine  Islands 
that  we  will  set  them  free,  and  it  has  been  one 
of  our  perplexities  how  we  should  make  them 
safe  after  we  set  them  free.  Before  this  confer- 
ence at  Paris,  the  only  thing  that  could  be 
suggested  was  that  we  should  get  a common 
guaranty  from  all  the  nations  of  the  world 
that  the  Philippines  should  be  regarded  as 
neutral,  just  as  Belgium  was  once  regarded  as 
neutral,  and  that  they  should  guarantee  her 
inviolability,  because  it  was  certainly  to  be 
expected  that  she  ^KQuld  not  be  powerful 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

enough  to  take  care  of  herself  against  those 
who  might  wish  to  commit  aggression  against 
her.  Under  this  arrangement  it  will  be  safe 
from  the  outset.  They  will  become  members 
of  the  League  of  Nations,  every  great  nation 
in  the  world  will  be  pledged  to  respect  and 
preserve  against  external  aggression  from  any 
quarter  the  territorial  integrity  and  political 
independence  of  the  Philippines.  It  simplifies 
one  of  the  most  perplexing  problems  that  has 
ever  faced  the  American  public,  but  it  does 
not  simplify  our  problems  merely;  it  illus- 
trates the  triumph  of  the  American  spirit. 

HOW  THE  LEAGUE  WILL  CONSTRUE 
ARTICLE  TEN 

Gentlemen  say,  “We  do  not  want  the  United 
States  drawn  into  every  little  European 
squabble.  Of  course  we  do  not,  and  under  the 
League  of  Nations  it  is  entirely  within  our 
choice  whether  we  will  be  or  not.  The  normal 
processes  of  the  action  of  the  League  are  cer- 
tainly to  be  this.  When  trouble  arises  in  the 
Balkans,  when  somebody  sets  up  a fire  some- 
where in  Central  Europe  among  those  little 
nations,  which  are  for  the  time  being  looking 
upon  one  another  with  a good  deal  of  jealousy 
and  suspicion,  because  the  passions  of  the 
world  have  not  cooled — whenever  that  hap- 
pens, the  Council  of  the  League  will  confer  as 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

to  the  best  methods  of  putting  out  the  fire.  If 
you  want  to  put  out  a fire  in  Utah,  you  do  not 
send  to  Oklahoma  for  the  fire  engines.  If  you 
want  to  put  out  a fire  in  the  Balkans,  if  you 
want  to  stamp  out  the  smouldering  flames  in 
some  part  of  Central  Europe,  you  do  not  send 
to  the  United  States  for  troops.  The  Council  of 
the  League  selects  the  powers  which  are  most 
ready,  most  available,  most  suitable,  and  se- 
lects them  only  at  their  own  consent,  so  that 
theUnitedStates  would  in  no  such  circumstan- 
ces conceivably  be  drawn  in  unless  the  flame 
spread  to  the  world;  and  would  they  then  be 
left  out, even  if  they  were  not  members  of  the 
League?  You  have  seen  the  fire  spread  to  the 
world  once,  and  did  you  not  go  in  ? If  you  saw  it 
spread  again,  if  you  saw  human  liberty  again 
imperilled,  would  you  wait  to  be  a member  of 
the  League  to  go  in  ? In  a war  which  imperils 
the  just  arrangements  of  mankind,  America, 
the  greatest,  richest,  freest  people  in  the  world 
must  take  sides.  We  could  not  live  without 
taking  sides.  If  the  fight  is  big  enough  to  draw 
the  United  States  in,  I predict  they  will  be 
drawn  in  anyhow,  and  if  it  is  not  big  enough 
to  bring  them  in  inevitably,  they  can  go  in  or 
stay  out  according  to  their  own  decision.  If 
that  is  not  an  open  and  shut  security,  I do 
not  know  of  any.  Yet  that  is  Article  Ten!1 
1See  Appendix  E. 


[89] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 


THE  MONROE  DOCTRINE 

One  of  the  other  suggestions  I carried  to  Paris 
was  that  the  Committees  of  the  two  Houses 
did  not  find  the  Monroe  Doctrine  safeguarded 
in  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations.  I 
suggested  that  to  the  conference  in  Paris,  and 
they  at  once  inserted  the  provision  which  is 
now  there  that  nothing  in  that  Covenant  shall 
be  construed  as  affecting  the  validity  of  the 
Monroe  Doctrine.  I do  not  see  what  more  you 
;an  say.  Can  you? 

I want  you  to  realize  how  extraordinary 
that  provision  is.  That  is  the  most  extraordi- 
nary sentence  in  that  Treaty,  for  this  reason: 
Up  to  that  time  there  was  not  a nation  in  the 
world  that  was  willing  to  admit  the  validity 
of  the  Monroe  Doctrine.  The  rest  of  the  world 
always  looked  askance  on  the  Monroe  Doc- 
trine. Great  Britain  did  not  like  the  Monroe 
Doctrine  as  we  grew  big.  It  was  one  thing  to 
have  our  assistance  and  another  thing  for  us 
not  to  need  her  assistance. 

Every  nation  in  the  world  had  been  jealous 
of  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  had  studiously 
avoided  doing  or  saying  anything  that  would 
admit  its  validity,  and  here  are  all  the  great 
nations  of  the  world  signing  a document 
which  admits  its  validity.  By  a sudden  turn  in 
the  whole  judgment  of  the  world  the  Monroe 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

Doctrine  was  accepted  by  all  the  great  powers 
of  the  world.  It  not  only  is  not  impaired  but  it 
has  the  backing  of  the  world.  That  consti- 
tutes nothing  less  than  a moral  revolution  in 
the  attitude  of  the  rest  of  the 'world  toward 
America. 

What  is  the  validity  of  the  Monroe  Do&r 
trine?  The  Monroe  Doctrine  means  that  if 
any  outside  power,  any  power  outside  this 
Hemisphere,  tries  to  impose  its  will  upon  any 
portion  of  the  Western  Hemisphere,  the  Uni- 
ted States  is  at  liberty  to  act  independently 
and  alone  in  repelling  the  aggression;  that  it 
does  not  have  to  wait  for  the  action  of  the 
League  of  Nations;  that  it  does  not  have  to 
wait  for  anything  but  the  action  of  its  own 
Administration  and  its  own  Congress.  The 
Monroe  Doctrine  says  that  if  anybody  tries  }> 
to  interfere  with  affairs  in  the  Western  Hemis- 
phere it  will  be  regarded  as  an  unfriendly  act 
to  the  United  States — not  to  the  rest  of  the 
world — and  that  means  that  the  United 
States  will  look  after  it,  and  will  not  ask  any- 
body’s permission  to  look  after  it.  The  docu- 
ment says  that  nothing  in  this  document  is  to 
be  construed  as  interfering  with  that.  Could 
anything  be  plainer  than  that?  Nothing  can  - 
henceforth  embarrass  the  policy  of  the  United 
States  in  applying  the  Monroe  Doctrine  ac- 
cording to  her  own  judgment. 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

And  at  last,  in  the  Covenant  of  the  League 
of  Nations,  the  Monroe  Doctrine  has  become 
the  doctrine  of  the  world.  Not  only  may  no 
European  power  impair  the  territorial  integ- 
rity or  interfere  with  the  political  indepen- 
dence of  any  State  in  the  Americas,  but  no 
power  anywhere  may  impair  the  territorial  in- 
tegrity or  invade  the  political  independence  of 
another  power.  The  principle  that  Mr.  Cann- 
ing suggested  to  Mr.  Monroe  has  now  been 
vindicated  by  its  adoption  by  the  representa- 
tives of  mankind. 

DOMESTIC  QUESTIONS 

In  the  next  place  they  are  afraid  that  other 
nations  will  interfere  in  our  domestic  ques- 
tions. There,  again  (the  Covenant  of  the 
League  distinctly  says  that  if  any  dispute 
arises  which  is  found  to  relate  to  an  exclusive- 
I domestic  question,  the  council  shall  take 
no  action  with  regard  to  it,  and  make  no  re- 
-*qx)rt  concerning  it,  and  the  questions  that 
these  gentlemen  most  often  mention,  namely 
the  questions  of  the  tariff  and  of  immigration 
and  of  naturalization  are  acknowledged  by 
every  authoritative  student  of  international 
law  without  exception,  to  be,  as  of  course,  do- 
mestic questions.  These  gentlemen  want  us  to 
make  an  obvious  thing  painfully  obvious  by 
making  a list  of  domestic  questions,  and  I ob- 

[92] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

ject  to  making  a list  for  this  very  reason,  that 
if  you  make  a list  you  may  leave  something 
out.  I remind  all  students  of  the  law  of  the  old 
principle  of  the  law  that  the  mention  of  one 
thing  is  the  exclusion  of  other  things;  that  if 
you  meant  everything,  you  ought  to  have  said 
everything;  that  if  you  said  a few  things  you 
did  not  have  the  rest  in  mind. 

I object  to  making  a list  of  domestic  ques- 
tions, because  a domestic  question  may  come 
up  which  I did  not  think  of.  For  example,  they 
have  been  very  much  worried  at  the  phrase 
that  nothing  in  the  document  shall  be  taken 
as  impairing  in  any  way  the  validity  of  such 
regional  understandings  as  the  Monroe  Doc- 
trine. They  say,  “Why  pilt  in  ‘such  regional 
understandings  as”  ’ ? What  other  understand- 
ings are  there?  Have  you  got  something  up 
your  sleeve?  Is  there  going  to  be  a Monroe 
Doctrine  in  China?  Why,  the  phrase  was 
written  in  perfect  innocence.  The  men  with 
whom  I was  associated  said,  “It  is  not  wise  to 
put  a specific  thing  that  belongs  only  to  one 
nation  in  a document  like  this.  We  do  not 
know  of  any  other  regional  understandings 
like  it;  we  never  heard  of  any  other;  we  never 
expect  to  hear  of  any  other,  but  there  might 
some  day  be  some  other,  and  so  we  will  say, 
‘such  regional  understandings  as  the  Monroe 
Doctrine,’  ” and  their  phase  was  intended  to 

[93] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

give  right  of  way  to  the  Monroe  Doctrine  in 
the  Western  Hemisphere.  In  every  such  case 
the  United  States  would  be  just  as  secure  in 
her  independent  handling  of  the  question  as 
she  is  now.  There  is  no  obscurity  whatever  in 
this  Covenant  with  regard  to  the  safeguarding 
of  the  United  States,  along  with  other  sover- 
eign countries,  in  the  control  of  domestic 
questions.  Throughout  these  conferences  it 
was  necessary  at  every  turn  to  safeguard  the 
sovereign  independence  of  the  several  govern- 
ments who  were  taking  part  in  the  conference, 
and  they  were  just  as  keen  to  protect  them- 
selves against  outside  intervention  in  domes- 
tic matters  as  we  were.  Therefore  the  whole- 
heartedness of  their  concurrent  opinion  runs 
with  this  safeguarding  of  domestic  questions. 

SIX  VOTES  OF  THE  BRITISH  EMPIRE 

There  is  another  matter.  They  say  the  British 
Empire  has  six  votes  and  we  have  only  one. 
The  answer  to  that  is  that  it  is  most  carefully 
arranged  that  our  one  vote  equals  the  six 
votes  of  the  British  Empire.  The  justification 
for  the  representation  of  more  than  one  part 
of  the  British  Empire  was  that  the  British 
Empire  is  made  up  of  semi-independent  pieces, 
as  no  other  empire  in  the  world  is.  You  know 
how  Canada,  for  example,  passes  her  own 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

tariff  law,  does  what  she  pleases  to  inconveni- 
ence the  trade  of  the  mother  country. 

Somebody  has  said  that  this  Covenant  was 
an  arrangement  for  the  dominance  of  Great 
Britain,  and  he  based  that  upon  the  fact  that 
in  the  Assembly  of  the  League  there  are  six 
representatives  of  the  various  parts  of  the 
British  Empire.  There  are  really  more  than 
that,  because  each  member  of  the  Assembly 
has  three  representatives,  but  six1  units  of  thfe. 
British  Empire  are  represented,  whereas  the 
United  States  is  represented  as  only  one  unit. 

Anybody  who  will  take  the  pains  to  read 
the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations  will 
find  out  that  the  Assembly,  and  it  is  only  in 
the  Assembly  that  the  British  Empire  has  six 
votes,  is  not  a voting  body.  I am  perfectly 
content  to  have  only  one  when  the  one  counts 
six,  and  that  is  exactly  the  arrangement  under 
the  League.  I do  not  want  to  be  a repeater — 
if  my  one  vote  goes,  I do  not  want  to  repeat  it 
five  times. 

Let  us  examine  the  matter  a little  morfpar^' 
ticularly.  Besides  the  vote  of  Great  Britain 
herself,  the  other  five  votes  are  the  votes  of 
Canada,  of  South  Africa,  of  Australia,  of  New 
Zealand  and  of  India.  We  ourselves  were 
champions  of  giving  a vote  to  Panama  and  of 

AVith  Ireland  admitted  to  the  League  in  September,  1923, 
the  British  Empire  will  have  seven  votes.  H.F. 

[95] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

giving  a vote  to  Cuba.  I ask  you  in  debating 
the  affairs  of  mankind,  would  it  have  been 
fair  to  give  Panama  a vote,  as  she  will  have, 
Cuba  a vote,  both  of  them  very  much  under 
the  influence  of  the  United  States,  and  not 
give  a vote  to  the  Dominion  of  Canada?  Do 
you  not  think  that  that  fine  Dominion  has 
been  a very  good  neighbor  ? Do  you  not  think 
she  is  a good  deal  more  like  the  United  States 
than  she  is  like  Great  Britain?  Is  not  Canada 
more  likely  to  agree  with  the  United  States 
than  with  Great  Britain  ? Do  you  not  feel  that 
probably  you  think  alike? 

Do  you  think  it  unjust  that  that  little  Re- 
public down  in  South  Africa,  whose  gallant 
resistance  to  be  subjected  to  any  outside  au- 
thority at  all,  we  admired  for  so  many  months 
and  whose  fortunes  we  followed  with  such  in- 
terest, should  have  the  right  to  stand  up  and 
talk  before  the  world?  They  talked  once  with 
their  arms,  and  if  I may  judge  by  my  contact 
with  them,  they  can  talk  with  their  minds! 
Great  Britain  obliged  South  Africa  to  submit 
to  her  sovereignty,  but  she  immediately  after 
felt  that  it  was  convenient  and  right  to  hand 
the  whole  self-government  of  that  colony  over 
to  the  very  men  whom  she  had  beaten.  The 
representatives  of  South  Africa  in  Paris  were 
two  of  the  most  distinguished  generals  of  the 
Boer  Army,  two  of  the  realest  men  I ever  met, 

[96] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

two  men  that  could  talk  sober  counsel  and 
wise  advice  along  with  the  best  statesmen  of 
Europe.  They  were  men  who  spoke  frank 
counsel.  To  exclude  General  Botha  and  Gen- 
eral Smuts  from  the  right  to  stand  up  in  the 
Parliament  of  the  World,  and  say  something 
concerning  the  affairs  of  mankind,  would  be 
absurd. 

Do  you  think  that  it  was  unjust  that  Aus- 
tralia should  be  allowed  to  stand  up  and  take 
part  in  the  debate — Australia  from  which  we 
have  learned  some  of  the  most  useful  progres- 
sive policies  of  modern  time,  a little  nation 
only  five  million  in  a great  continent,  but 
counting  for  several  times  five  in  its  activities 
and  in  its  interest  in  liberal  reform.  Do  you 
not  know  how  Australia  has  led  the  free  peo- 
ple of  the  world  in  many  matters  that  have 
led  to  social  and  industrial  reform  ? It  is  one  of 
the  most  enlightened  communities  in  the 
world  and  absolutely  free  to  choose  its  own 
way  of  life,  independent  of  the  British  author- 
ity, except  in  matters  of  foreign  relationship. 
When  I was  in  Paris  the  men  I could  not  tell 
apart,  except  by  their  hats,  were  the  Ameri- 
cans and  the  Australians.  They  both  had  the 
swing  of  the  fellows  who  say,  “The  gang  is  all 
here,  what, — do  we  care?” 

Could  we  deny  a vote  to  that  other  little 
self-governing  nation,  for  it  practically  is  such 

[97] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

in  everything  but  its  foreign  affairs — New 
Zealand — or  to  that  great  voiceless  multitude, 
that  throng  hundreds  of  millions  strong  in 
India? 

I want  to  testify  that  some  of  the  wisest 
and  most  dignified  figures  in  the  Peace  Con- 
ference at  Paris  came  from  India — men  who 
seemed  to  carry  in  their  minds  an  older  wis- 
dom than  the  rest  of  us  had,  whose  traditions 
ran  back  into  so  many  of  the  unhappy  for- 
tunes of  mankind  that  they  seemed  very  use- 
ful counsellors  as  to  how  some  ray  of  hope  and 
some  prospect  of  happiness  could  be  opened 
to  its  people.  I am  willing  that  India  should 
stand  up  in  the  councils  of  the  world  and  say 
something. 

I am  willing  that  speaking  parts  should  be 
assigned  to  these  self-governing,  self-respect- 
ing, and  energetic  portions  of  the  great  body 
of  humanity.  Would  you  want  to  deprive 
these  great  communities  of  a voice  in  the  de- 
bate? It  is  a proposition  that  has  never  been 
stated,  because  to  state  it,  answers  it. 

But  having  given  these  six  votes,  what  are 
the  facts?  You  have  been  misled  with  regard 
to  them.  Disputes  can  arise  only  through  the 
governments  which  have  international  repre- 
sentation. In  other  words,  diplomatically 
speaking,  there  is  only  one  British  Empire. 
The  parts  of  it  are  but  pieces  of  the  whole. 

[98] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

The  dispute,  therefore,  would  be  between  the 
United  States  as  a diplomatic  unit  and  the 
British  Empire  as  a diplomatic  unit.  That  is 
the  only  ground  upon  which  the  two  nations 
could  deal  with  one  another,  whether  by  way 
of  dispute  or  agreement.  They  cannot  out- 
vote us.  These  six  votes  are  in  the  Assembly, 
not  in  the  Council.  There  is  only  one  thing 
that  the  Assembly  votes  on  in  which  it  can  de- 
cide a matter  without  the  concurrence  of  all 
the  states  represented  on  the  Council,  and 
that  is  the  admission  of  new  members  to  the 
League  of  Nations.  With  the  single  exception 
of  admitting  new  members  to  the  League  there 
is  no  energy  in  the  six  votes  which  is  not  offset 
by  the  energy  in  the  one  vote  of  the  United 
States  and  I am  more  satisfied  to  be  one  and 
count  six  than  to  be  six  and  count  only  six. 
With  regard  to  every  other  matter,  for  exam- 
ple, amendments  to  the  Covenant,  with  re- 
gard to  cases  referred  out  of  the  Council  to  the 
Assembly,  it  is  provided  that  if  a majority  of 
the  Assembly  and  the  representatives  of  all 
the  States  represented  on  the  Council  concur, 
the  vote  shall  be  valid  and  conclusive,  which 
means  that  the  affirmative  vote  of  the  United 
States  is  in  every  instance  just  as  powerful  as 
the  six  votes  of  the  British  Empire.  There  is 
no  validity  in  a vote  by  the  Council  or  the  As- 
sembly, in  which  we  do  not  concur.  I took  the 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

pains  to  go  through  the  Covenant  almost  sen- 
tence by  sentence  again,  to  find  if  there  was 
any  case  other  than  the  one  I have  mentioned, 
in  which  that  was  not  true,  and  there  is  no 
other  case  in  which  that  is  not  true.  No  active 
policy  can  be  undertaken  by  the  League  with- 
out the  assenting  vote  of  the  United  States.  I 
think  that  is  a perfectly  safe  situation! 

Of  course,  you  will  understand  that  wher- 
ever the  United  States  is  a party  to  a quarrel 
and  that  quarrel  is  carried  to  the  Assembly, 
we  cannot  vote;  similarly,  if  the  British  Em- 
pire is  a party,  her  six  representatives  cannot 
vote.  It  is  an  even  break  any  way  you  take  it, 
and  I would  rather  count  six  as  one  person 
than  six  as  six  persons.  So  far  as  I can  see,  it 
makes  me  a bigger  man.  The  point  to  remem- 
ber is  that  the  energy  of  the  League  of  Na- 

\tions  resides  in  the  Council,  not  in  the  Assem- 
bly, and  that  in  the  Council  there  is  a perfect 
equality  of  votes.  The  six  votes  of  the  British 
Empire  are  offset  by  our  own,  if  we  choose  to 
offset  them.  I dare  say  we  shall  often  agree 
with  them,  but  if  we  do  not,  they  cannot  do 
anything  to  which  we  do  not  consent.  This 
thing  that  has  been  talked  about  is  a delusion. 
The  United  States  is  not  easily  frightened, 
and  I dare  say  it  is  least  easily  frightened  by 
things  that  are  not  true. 

Let  us  be  big  enough  to  know  the  facts  and 

[ ioo  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

to  welcome  the  facts,  because  the  facts  are 
based  upon  the  principle  that  America  has  al- 
ways fought  for,  namely,  the  equality  of  self- 
governing  peoples,  whether  they  were  big  or 
little — not  counting  men,  but  counting  rights, 
not  counting  representation,  but  counting  the 
purpose  of  that  representation.  When  you 
hear  an  opinion  quoted,  you  do  not  count  the 
number  of  persons  who  hold  it;  you  ask,  “Who 
said  that?”  You  weigh  opinions,  you  do  not 
count  them,  and  the  beauty  of  all  democracies 
is  that  every  voice  can  be  heard,  every  voice 
can  have  its  effect,  every  voice  can  contribute 
to  the  general  judgment  that  is  finally  arrived 
at.  That  is  the  object  of  democracy.  Let  us 
accept  what  America  has  always  fought  for, 
and  accept  it  with  pride  that  America  showed 
the  way  and  made  the  proposal.  I do  not 
mean  that  America  made  the  proposal  in  this 
particular  instance;  I mean  that  the  principle 
was  an  American  principle,  proposed  by 
America. 

ARTICLE  ELEVEN 

I want  you  to  notice  another  interesting  point 
that  is  never  dilated  upon  in  connection  with 
the  League  of  Nations.  I want  to  call  your  at- 
tention to  Article  Eleven,  following  Article 
Ten,  of  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Na- 
tions. That  article  is  the  favorite  article  in  the 

[ ioi  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

Treaty,  so  far  as  I am  concerned.  Under  Arti- 
cle Eleven,  any  member  of  the  League  can  at 
any  time  call  attention  to  anything,  any- 
where, which  is  likely  to  disturb  the  peace  of 
the  world  or  the  good  understanding  between 
nations  upon  which  the  peace  of  the  world  de- 
pends. This  Covenant  makes  it  the  right  of 
the  United  States  and  not  the  right  of  the 
United  States  merely,  but  the  right  of  the 
weakest  nation  in  the  world  to  bring  anything 
that  the  most  powerful  nation  in  the  world  is 
doing  that  is  likely  to  disturb  the  peace  of  the 
world  under  the  scrutiny  of  mankind.  The 
smallest  nation  along  with  the  largest — Pan- 
ama— to  take  one  of  our  near  neighbors — can 
stand  up  and  challenge  the  right  of  any  na- 
tion in  the  world  to  do  anything  which  threat- 
ened the  peace  of  the  world.  It  does  not  have 
to  be  a big  nation  to  do  it.  Nothing  is  going  to 
keep  this  world  fit  to  live  in  like  exposing  in 
public  every  crooked  thing  that  is  going  on. 
The  peace  of  the  world  is  everybody’s  busi- 
ness. If  you  think  a policy  good  you  will  ven- 
ture to  talk  about  it.  If  you  think  it  is  bad, 
you  will  not  consent  to  talk  about  it.  You  can 
not  afford  to  discuss  a thing  when  you  are  in 
the  wrong,  and  the  minute  you  feel  that  the 
whole  judgment  of  the  world  is  against  you, 
you  have  a different  temper  in  affairs  alto- 
gether. The  weak  and  oppressed  and  wronged 

[ 102  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

peoples  of  the  world  have  never  before  had  a 
forum  made  for  them  in  which  they  can  sum- 
mon their  enemies  into  the  presence  of  the 
judgment  of  mankind,  and  if  there  is  one  tri- 
bunal that  the  wrongdoer  ought  to  dread  more 
than  another,  it  is  that  tribunal  of  the  opinion 
of  mankind. 

You  remember  those  immortal  words  in  the 
opening  part  of  the  Declaration  of  Indepen- 
dence, “that  out  of  respect  to  the  opinion  of 
mankind  the  causes  which  have  led  the  people 
of  the  American  colonies  to  declare  their  inde- 
pendence are  here  set  forth’’!  America  was 
the  first  country  in  the  world  which  laid  before 
all  mankind  the  reason  why  it  went  to  war. 
America  was  the  first  to  set  that  example,  the 
first  to  admit  that  right  and  justice  and  even 
the  basis  of  revolution  was  a matter  upon 
which  mankind  is  entitled  to  form  a judg- 
ment, and  this  Treaty  is  the  exaltation  and 
permanent  establishment  of  the  American 
principle  of  warfare  and  of  right. 

INTERNATIONAL  LAW  COMPLETELY 
CHANGED 

What  is  the  international  law?  International 
law  up  to  this  time  has  been  the  most  singular 
code  of  manners.  You  could  not  mention  to 
any  other  government  anything  that  con- 
cerned it  unless  you  could  prove  that  your 

[ 103  i 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

own  interests  were  involved.  International  law 
is  that  no  matter  how  deeply  the  United 
States  is  interested  in  something  in  some  other 
part  of  the  world,  that  she  believes  is  going  to 
set  the  world  on  fire  or  disturb  the  friendly  re- 
lations between  two  great  nations,  she  cannot 
speak  of  it  unless  she  can  show  that  her  own 
interests  are  directly  involved.  It  is  a hostile 
and  unfriendly  act  to  call  attention  to  it,  and 
Article  Eleven  says,  in  so  many  words,  that  it 
shall  be  the  friendly  right  of  every  nation  to 
call  attention  to  any  such  matters  anywhere. 
In  other  words,  at  present,  we  have  to  mind 
our  own  business.  Under  the  Covenant  of  the 
League  of  Nations  we  can  mind  other  people’s 
business  and  everything  that  affects  the  peace 
of  the  world,  whether  we  are  parties  to  it  or 
not,  can  by  our  delegates  be  brought  to  the 
attention  of  mankind.  We  can  force  a nation 
on  the  other  side  of  the  globe  to  bring  to  that 
bar  of  mankind  any  wrong  that  is  afoot  in 
that  part  of  the  world  which  is  likely  to  affect 
the  good  understanding  between  nations,  and 
we  can  oblige  them  to  show  cause  why  it 
should  not  be  remedied.  There  is  not  an  op- 
pressed people  in  the  world  which  cannot 
henceforth  get  a hearing  at  that  forum,  and 
you  know  what  a hearing  will  mean  if  the 
cause  of  those  people  is  just.  The  one  thing 
that  those  who  are  doing  injustice  have  most 

[ 104  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

to  dread  is  publicity  and  discussion,  because 
if  you  are  challenged  to  give  a reason  why  you 
are  doing  a wrong  thing  it  has  to  be  an  exceed- 
ingly  good  reason,  and  if  you  give  a bad  reas- 
on you  confess  judgment  and  the  opinion  of 
mankind  goes  against  you. 

When  anybody  of  kin  to  us  in  America  is 
done  wrong  by  any  foreign  government,  it  is 
likely  to  disturb  the  good  understanding  be- 
tween nations  upon  which  the  peace  of  the 
world  depends,  and  thus  anyone  of  the  causes 
represented  in  the  hearts  of  the  American  peo- 
ple can  be  brought  to  the  attention  of  the 
whole  world.  Every  people  in  the  world  that 
have  not  got  what  they  think  they  ought  to 
have  is  thereby  given  a world  forum  in  which 
to  bring  the  thing  to  the  bar  of  mankind.  An 
incomparable  thing — a thing  that  never  was 
dreamed  of  before.  A thing  that  was  never 
conceived  as  possible  before — that  it  should 
not  be  regarded  as  an  unfriendly  act  on  the 
part  of  the  representatives  of  one  nation  to 
call  attention  to  something  being  done  within 
the  confines  of  another  empire  which  was  dis- 
turbing the  peace  of  the  world  and  the  good 
understanding  between  nations.  One  of  the 
most  effective  means  for  winning  a good  cause 
is  to  bring  it  before  that  great  jury.  The  only 
case  that  you  ought  to  bring  with  diffidence 
before  the  great  jury  of  men  throughout  the 

[ 105  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

world  is  the  case  that  you  cannot  establish. 
A bad  cause  will  fare  ill,  but  a good  cause  is 
bound  to  be  triumphant  in  such  a forum.  You 
dare  not  lay  a bad  cause  before  mankind.  You 
dare  not  kill  the  young  men  of  the  world  for  a 
dishonest  purpose.  It  is  not  only  we  who  are 
caught  in  the  implications  of  the  affairs  of  the 
world,  everybody  is  caught  in  it  now  and  it  is 
right  that  anything  that  affects  the  world 
should  be  made  everybody’s  business. 

Discussion  is  destructive  when  wrong  is  in- 
tended; and  all  the  nations  of  the  world  agree 
to  put  their  case  before  the  judgment  of  man- 
kind. The  nations  of  the  world  have  declared 
that  they  are  not  afraid  of  the  truth;  that 
they  are  willing  to  have  all  their  affairs  that 
are  likely  to  lead  to  international  complica- 
tions brought  into  the  open.  There  never  be- 
fore has  been  provided  a world  forum  in 
which  the  legitimate  grievances  of  peoples  en- 
titled to  consideration  can  be  brought  to  the 
common  judgment  of  mankind,  and  if  I were 
the  advocate  of  any  suppressed  or  oppressed 
people,  I surely  could  not  ask  any  better  forum 
than  to  stand  up  before  the  world  and  chal- 
lenge the  other  party  to  make  good  its  ex- 
cuses for  not  acting  in  that  case.  That  com- 
pulsion is  the  most  tremendous  moral  com- 
pulsion that  could  be  devised  by  organized 
mankind.  Human  beings  can  get  together  by 


[ 106  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

discussion,  and  it  is  the  business  of  civiliza- 
tion to  get  together  by  discussion  and  not  by 
fighting.  That  is  civilization.  That  has  been 
the  dream  of  thoughtful  reformers  for  gener- 
ation after  generation;  that  the  peace  of  the 
world  transcends  all  the  susceptibilities  of  na- 
tions and  governments,  and  that  they  are 
obliged  to  consent  to  discuss  and  explain 
anything  which  does  affect  the  understanding 
between  nations.  That  in  itself  constitutes  a 
revolution  in  international  relationships.  All 
forward-looking  men  may  now  see  their  way 
to  the  method  in  which  they  may  help  forward 
the  real  process  of  civilization.1 

SECRET  TREATIES 

There  can  hereafter  be  no  secret  treaties. 
From  this  time  forth  all  the  world  is  going  to 
know  what  all  the  agreements  between  na- 
tions are.  It  is  going  to  know,  not  their  gener- 
al character  merely,  but  their  exact  language 
and  contents. 

This  Covenant  cures  one  of  the  principal 
difficulties  we  encountered  at  Paris.  At  every 
turn  in  these  discussions  we  came  across  some 
secret  treaty,  some  understanding  that  had 
never  been  made  public  before,  some  under- 
standing which  embarrassed  the  whole  settle- 
ment. It  was  very  embarrassing  when  you 
hVoodrow  Wilson  wrote  Article  Eleven.  H.F. 

[ 107  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

thought  you  were  approaching  an  ideal  solu- 
tion of  a particular  question  to  find  that  some 
of  your  principal  colleagues  had  given  the 
whole  thing  away.  I think  it  will  not  be  im- 
proper for  me  to  refer  to  one  of  them — the 
matter  of  the  cession  to  Japan  of  the  interest 
of  Germany  in  Shantung,  in  China.  I am  not 
going  to  discuss  the  merits  of  that  question, 
because  it  had  no  merits.  The  whole  thing  was 
bad.  My  present  point  is  that  there  stood  at 
the  gate  of  that  settlement  a secret  treaty  be- 
tween Japan  and  two  of  the  great  powers  en- 
gaged in  this  war  on  our  side.  We  could  not 
ask  them  to  disregard  those  promises.  This 
war  had  been  fought  in  part  because  of  the  re- 
fusal to  observe  the  fidelity  which  is  involved 
in  a promise,  because  of  the  failure  to  regard 
the  sacredness  of  treaties,  and  this  Covenant 
of  the  League  of  Nations  provides  that  no  se- 
cret treaty  shall  have  any  validity.  It  pro- 
vides in  explicit  terms  that  every  treaty,  ev- 
ery international  understanding,  shall  be  reg- 
istered with  the  Secretary  of  the  League;  that 
it  shall  be  published  as  soon  as  possible  after 
it  is  there  registered;  and  that  no  treaty  that 
is  not  there  registered  will  be  regarded  by  any 
of  the  nations  engaged  in  the  Covenant.  It  is 
like  our  arrangements  with  regard  to  mort- 
gages on  real  estate,  that  until  they  are  regis- 
tered nobody  else  need  pay  any  attention  to 

[ 108  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

them;  and  so  with  the  treaties — until  they 
are  registered  in  this  office  of  the  League,  no- 
body, not  even  the  parties  themselves,  can  in- 
sist upon  their  execution.  Just  as  you  can  go 
to  the  courthouse  and  see  all  the  mortgages  on 
all  the  real  estate  in  your  county,  you  can  go 
to  the  general  Secretariat  of  the  League  of 
Nations  and  find  all  the  mortgages  on  all  the 
nations.  This  Treaty,  in  short,  is  a great  clear- 
ing house.  It  is  very  little  short  of  a cancelling 
of  the  past  and  an  ihsurance  of  the  future. 

You  have  cleared  the  deck  thereby  of  the 
most  dangerous  thirig  and  the  most  embar- 
rassing thing  that  has  hitherto  existed  in  in- 
ternational politics.  There  were  nations  rep- 
resented around  that  board — I mean  the 
board  at  which  the  commission  on  the  League 
of  Nations  sat,  where  fourteen  nations  were 
represented — there  were  nations  represented 
around  that  board  who  had  entered  into 
many  a secret  treaty  and  understanding,  and 
they  made  not  the  least  objection  to  promis- 
ing that  hereafter  no  secret  treaty  should  have 
any  validity  whatever.  So  that  we  not  only 
have  the  right  to  discuss  anything,  but  we 
make  everything  open  for  discussion.  If  this 
Covenant  accomplished  little  more  than  the 
abolition  of  private  arrangements  between 
great  powers,  it  would  have  gone  far  toward 
stabilizing  the  peace  of  the  world  and  secur- 

[ 109  J 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

ing  justice,  which  it  has  been  so  difficult  to  se- 
cure, so  long  as  nations  could  come  to  secret 
understandings  with  one  another.  In  other 
words,  we  have  the  pledge  of  all  the  nations 
of  the  world  that  they  will  sit  down  and  talk 
everything  over  that  is  apt  to  make  trouble 
amongst  them,  and  that  they  will  talk  it  over 
in  public,  so  that  the  whole  illuminating  proc- 
ess of  public  knowledge  and  public  discussion 
may  penetrate  every  part  of  the  conference. 
Everything  is  to  be  open.  Everything  is  to  be 
upon  the  table  around  which  sit  the  represen- 
tatives of  all  the  world,  the  Asiatic,  the  Afri- 
can, the  American,  the  European.  That  is  the 
promise  of  the  future;  that  is  the  security  of 
the  future. 

SHANTUNG 

hat  matter  of  the  cession  of  certain  German 


ghts  in  Shantung  Province  in  China,  is  con- 


nected with  this  Treaty  but  not  with  the 
League  of  Nations.  I think  that  it  is  worth 
while  to  make  that  matter  pretty  clear,  and  I 
will  ask  you  to  be  patient  while  I make  a brief 
historical  review  in  order  to  make  it  clear. 

What  happened  under  the  old  order  of 
things?  The  story  begins  in  1898.  What  hap- 
pened was  that  two  German  missionaries  in 
China  had  been  murdered.  The  central  Gov- 
ernment at  Peking  had  done  everything  that 
was  in  its  power  to  do  to  quiet  the  local  dis- 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

turbances,  to  allay  the  local  prejudice  against 
foreigners  which  led  to  the  murders,  but  had 
been  unable  to  do  so,  and  the  German  Gov- 
ernment held  them  responsible,  nevertheless, 
for  the  murder  of  the  missionaries.  It  was  not 
the  missionaries  that  the  German  Govern- 
ment was  interested  in;  that  was  a pretext.  It 
makes  anybody  who  regards  himself  as  a 
Christian  blush  to  think  what  Christian  na- 
tions have  done  in  the  name  of  protecting 
Christianity.  That  was  what  Germany  did. 
She  insisted  that  because  of  this  thing  hap- 
pening, for  which  the  Peking  Government 
could  not  really  with  justice  be  held  respon- 
sible, a very  large  and  important  part  of  one 
of  the  richest  Provinces  of  China  should  be 
ceded  to  her  for  sovereign  control,  for  a period 
of  ninety-nine  years,  that  she  should  have  the 
right  to  penetrate  the  interior  of  that  Prov- 
ince with  a railway,  and  that  she  should  have 
the  right  to  exploit  any  ores  that  lay  within 
thirty  miles  either  side  of  that  railway.  There 
was  no  adequate  excuse  for  what  Germany 
exacted  of  China.  I read  again  only  the  other 
day  the  phrases  in  which  poor  China  was 
made  to  make  the  concessions.  She  was  made 
to  make  them  in  words  dictated  by  Germany, 
in  view  of  her  gratitude  to  Germany  for  cer- 
tain services  rendered — the  deepest  hypocrisy 
conceivable.  She  was  obliged  to  do  so  by  force. 

[ in  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

That  was  the  beginning.  We  are  thinking 
so  much  about  that  concession  to  Germany, 
that  we  have  forgotten  that  practically  all  of 
the  great  European  powers  had  exacted  simi- 
lar concessions  of  China  previously;  they  had 
already  had  their  foothold  of  control  in  China; 
they  had  already  had  their  control  of  rail- 
ways; they  already  had  their  exclusive  con- 
cessions over  mines.  Germany  was  doing  an 
outrageous  thing,  I take  the  liberty  of  saying, 
as  the  others  had  done  outrageous  things,  but 
it  was  not  the  first;  at  least,  it  had  been  done 
before.  China  lay  rich  and  undeveloped  and 
the  rest  of  the  world  was  covetous  and  it  had 
made  bargains  with  China,  generally  to 
China’s  disadvantage  which  enabled  the 
world  to  go  in  and  exploit  her  riches.  Germany 
obliged  China  to  give  her  what  China  had 
given  others  previously.  Immediately  there- 
after China  was  obliged,  because  she  had  done 
this,  to  make  fresh  concessions  to  Great  Brit- 
ain of  a similar  sort,  to  make  fresh  concessions 
to  France,  to  make  concessions  of  a similar 
kind  to  Russia.  It  was  then  that  she  gave  Rus- 
sia Port  Arthur  and  Talien-Wan. 

Now  remember  what  followed.  The  Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  did  not  make 
any  kind  of  protest  against  any  of  those  con- 
cessions. No  protest  was  made  by  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  Stafes  against  the  orig- 

[ ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

inal  cession  of  this  Shantung  territory  to  Ger- 
many. We  had  at  that  time  one  of  the  most 
public-spirited  and  humane  men  in  the  exec- 
utive chair  at  Washington  that  have  ever 
graced  that  chair — I mean  William  McKinley 
- — and  his  Secretary  of  State  was  a man  whom 
we  have  always  delighted  to  praise,  Mr.  John 
Hay.  But  they  made  no  protest  against  the 
cession  to  Germany,  or  to  Russia  or  to  Great 
Britain  or  to  France.  The  only  thing  they  in- 
sisted on  was  that  none  of  those  powers  should 
close  the  doors  of  commerce  to  the  goods  of 
the  United  States  in  those  territories  which 
they  were  taking  from  China.  You  have  heard 
of  Mr.  Hay’s  policy  of  the  Open  Door.  That 
was  his  policy  of  the  open  door — not  the  open 
door  to  the  right  of  China,  but  the  open  door 
to  the  goods  of  America.  They  took  no  inter- 
est, I mean  so  far  as  what  they  did  was  con- 
cerned, in  the  liberties  and  rights  of  China. 
They  were  interested  only  in  the  right  of  the 
merchants  of  the  United  States.  They  there- 
fore, demanded  and  obtained  promises  that 
we  could  continue  to  sell  merchandise  in 
Shantung.  Just  so  we  could  trade  with  those 
stolen  territories  we  were  willing  to  let  them 
be  stolen.  All  they  asked  was  that  Germany, 
after  she  got  what  did  not  belong  to  her,  would 
please  not  close  the  door  against  the  trade  of 
the  United  States.  I am  not  saying  this  by 

[ ii 3 ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

way  of  criticism.  I want  to  hasten  to  add  that 
I do  not  say  this  even  to  imply  criticism  on 
these  gentlemen.  That  is  all  that  under  inter- 
national manners  they  had  a right  to  ask.  I 
believe  Mr.  Hay,  if  he  had  seen  any  way  to 
accomplish  more  than  he  did  accomplish, 
would  have  attempted  to  do  so. 

Why  did  not  Mr.  Hay  protest  the  acquisi- 
tion of  those  rights  in  Shantung  by  Germany? 
Why  did  he  not  protest  what  England  got, 
and  what  France  got  and  what  Russia  got? 
Because  under  international  law,  as  it  then 
stood,  that  would  have  been  a hostile  act 
towards  those  governments.  The  law  of  the 
world  was  actually  such  that  if  you  men- 
tioned anybody  else’s  wrong  but  your  own, 
you  spoke  as  an  enemy.  They  could  not  lift  a 
little  finger  to  help  China.  They  could  only 
try  to  help  the  trade  of  the  United  States. 
Until  this  Treaty  was  written  in  Paris  it  was 
not  even  proposed  that  it  should  be  the  privi- 
lege of  anybody  to  protest  in  any  such  case  if 
his  own  rights  were  not  directly  affected. 

Then  came  the  war  between  Russia  and 
Japan,  and  what  happened?  Japan  did  what 
she  has  done  in  this  war.  She  attacked  Port 
Arthur  and  captured  it.  You  remember  where 
that  war  was  brought  to  a close — by  delegates 
of  the  two  powers  sitting  at  Portsmouth, 
N.  H.,  at  the  invitation  of  Mr.  Roosevelt, 

[ 1 14  1 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

who  was  then  President.  In  a treaty  signed  on 
our  own  sacred  territory,  at  Portsmouth  in 
New  Hampshire,  Japan  was  allowed  to  take 
from  Russia  what  had  belonged  to  China,  the 
concession  of  Port  Arthur  and  of  Talien-Wan, 
the  territory  in  that  neighborhood.  The  treaty 
was  written  here,  it  was  written  under  the 
auspices,  so  to  say,  of  our  own  public  opinion, 
but  the  Government  of  the  United  States  was 
not  at  liberty  to  protest  and  did  not  protest;  it 
acquiesced  in  the  very  thing  which  is  being 
done  in  this  Treaty.  What  is  being  done  in  this 
Treaty  is  not  that  Shantung  is  being  taken 
from  China.  China  did  not  have  it!  It  is  being 
taken  from  Germany,  just  as  Port  Arthur  was 
not  taken  from  China,  but  taken  from  Russia 
and  transferred  to  Japan. 

Before  we  got  into  this  war,  but  after  the 
war  had  begun,  because  they  deemed  the  as- 
sistance of  Japan  in  the  Pacific  absolutely  in- 
dispensable, Great  Britain  and  France  both 
agreed  that  if  Japan  would  enter  and  cooper-  , 
ate  in  the  war  she  could  do  the  same  thing 
with  regard  to  Shantung  that  she  had  done 
with  regard  to  Pert  Arthur;  that  if  she  would 
take  what  Germany  had  in  China  she  could 
keep  it.  She  took  it!  They  were  bound  by  a,- 
treaty  of  which  we  knew  nothing,  but  which, 
notwithstanding  our  ignorance  of  it,  bound 
them  as  much  as  any  treaty  binds.  This  war 

[ H5  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

was  fought  to  maintain  the  sacredness  of 
treaties.  Great  Britain  and  France  therefore, 
cannot  consent  to  a change  of  the  Treaty  in 
respect  of  the  cession  of  Shantung,  and  we 
have  no  precedent  in  our  history  which  per- 
mits us  even  to  protest  against  it  until  we 
become  members  of  the  League  of  Nations. 

Well,  you  say,  “Then,  is  it  just  all  an  ugly 
hopeless  business?”  It  is  not,  if  we  adopt  the 
League  of  Nations.  The  Government  of  the 
United  States  was  not  bound  by  these  treaties. 
The  Government  of  the  United  States  was  at 
liberty  to  get  anything  out  of  the  bad  business 
that  it  could  get  by  persuasion  and  argument 
and  it  was  upon  the  instance  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  that  Japan  prom- 
ised to  return  to  China  what  none  of  these 
other  powers  has  yet  promised  to  return — all 
rights  of  sovereignty  that  China  had  granted 
Germany  over  any  portion  of  the  Province  of 
Shantung — the  greatest  concession  in  that 
matter  that  has  ever  been  made  by  any  power 
that  has  interested  itself  in  the  exploits  of 
China,  and  to  retain  only  what  corporations 
out  of  many  countries  have  long  enjoyed  in 
China,  the  right  to  run  the  railroad  and  ex- 
tend its  lines  to  certain  points  and  to  continue 
to  work  the  mines  that  have  already  been 
opened.  Scores  of  foreign  corporations  have 
that  right  in  other  parts  of  China.  The  only 

[ n6  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

promise  of  that  kind  ever  made,  the  only  re- 
linquishment of  that  sort  ever  achieved.  That 
is  her  promise,  and  personally  I have  not  the 
slightest  doubt  that  she  will  fulfill  that  prom- 
ise. But  I said  a minute  ago,  that  Mr.  Hay  and 
Mr.  McKinley  were  not  at  liberty  to  protest. 

Turn  to  the  League  of  Nations  and  see  what 
will  be  the  situation  then.  You  will  see  that  in- 
ternational law  is  revolutionized  by  putting 
morals  into  it.  I want  this  point  to  sink  in: 
The  League  of  Nations  changes  the  interna- 
tional law  of  the  world  with  regard  to  mat- 
ters of  this  sort.  Japan  solemnly  undertakes 
with  the  rest  of  us,  to  protect  the  territorial 
integrity  of  China,  along  with  the  territorial 
integrity  of  other  countries,  and  back  of  her 
promise  lies  the  similar  promise  of  every  other 
nation,  that  nowhere  will  they  countenance  a 
disregard  for  the  territorial  integrity  or  the 
political  independence  of  that  great  helpless 
people,  lying  there  hitherto  as  an  object  of 
prey  in  the  great  Orient.  It  is  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  the  world  that  anything  has 
been  done  for  China,  and  sitting  around  our 
council  board  in  Paris  I put  this  question: 
“May  I expect  that  this  will  be  the  beginning 
of  the  retrocession  to  China  of  the  exceptional 
rights  which  other  governments  have  enjoyed 
there?”  The  responsible  representatives  of  the 
other  great  governments  said,  “Yes,  you  may 

[ 117  1 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

expect  it.”  Expect  it?  What  I want  to  call 
your  attention  to  is  just  as  soon  as  this  Cove- 
nant is  ratified  every  nation  in  the  world  will 
have  the  right  to  speak  out  for  China;  and  I 
want  to  say  very  frankly,  and  I ought  to  add 
that  the  representatives  of  those  great  nations 
themselves  admit,  that  Great  Britain  and 
France  and  the  other  powers  which  have  in- 
sisted upon  similar  concessions  in  China  will 
be  put  in  a position  where  they  will  have  to 
reconsider  them.  This  is  the  only  way  to  serve 
and  redeem  China,  unless  indeed,  you  want  to 
start  a war  for  that  purpose! 

You  have  heard  a great  deal  about  Article 
Ten  of  the  Covenant  of  the  League,  but  read 
Article  Eleven  in  conjunction  with  Article 
Ten.  Every  member  of  the  League,  in  Article 
Ten,  agrees  never  to  impair  the  territorial  in- 
tegrity of  any  other  member  of  the  League  or 
to  interfere  with  its  existing  political  indepen- 
dence. Both  of  those  things  were  done  in  all 
these  concessions.  There  was  a very  serious 
impairment  of  the  territorial  integrity  of 
China  in  every  one  of  them,  and  a very  seri- 
ous interference  with  the  political  indepen- 
dence of  that  great  but  helpless  kingdom.  Ar- 
ticle Ten  stops  that  for  good  and  all.  Then  in 
Article  Eleven,  it  is  provided  that  it  shall  be 
the  friendly  right  of  any  member  of  the  League 
at  any  time,  to  call  attention  to  anything  any- 

[ n8  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

where,  that  is  likely  to  disturb  the  peace  of 
the  world  or  the  good  understanding  between 
nations  upon  which  the  peace  of  the  world  de- 
pends;) so  that  the  ban  would  have  been  lifted 
from  Mr.  McKinley  and  Mr.  Roosevelt  in  the 
matter  of  these  things  if  we  had  the  Covenant 
of  the  League;  they  could  have  gone  in  and 
said,  “Here  is  your  promise  to  preserve  the 
territorial  integrity  and  political  indepen- 
dence of  this  great  people.  We  have  the  friendly 
right  to  protest.  We  have  the  right  to  call 
your  attention  to  the  fact  that  this  will  breed 
wars  and  not  peace,  and  that  you  have  not 
the  right  to  do  this  thing.”  Henceforth,  for 
the  first  time,  we  shall  have  the  opportunity 
to  play  effective  friends  to  the  great  people  of 
China.  It  is  the  most  hopeful  change  in  the 
law  of  the  world  that  has  been  suggested  or 
adopted.  Are  you  willing  to  go  into  the  great 
adventure  of  liberating  hundreds  of  millions 
of  human  beings  from  the  threat  of  foreign 
power?  I,  for  one,  am  ready  to  do  anything  or 
to  cooperate  in  anything  in  my  power  to  be  a 
friend,  and  a helpful  friend,  to  that  great, 
thoughtful,  ancient,  interesting,  helpless  peo- 
ple— in  capacity,  in  imagination,  in  industry, 
in  numbers  one  of  the  greatest  peoples  in  the 
world  and  entitled  to  the  wealth  that  lies  un- 
derneath their  feet  and  all  about  them  in  that 
land  which  they  have  not  as  yet  known  how 
to  bring  to  its  development. 

[ 1 19  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

If  this  Treaty  is  entered  into  by  the  United 
States,  China  will  for  the  first  time  in  her  his- 
tory have  a forum  in  which  to  bring  every 
wrong  that  is  intended  against  her  or  that  has 
been  committed  against  her.  And  the  alterna- 
tive? If  you  insist  upon  cutting  out  the  Shan- 
tung arrangement,  that  merely  severs  us  from 
the  Treaty.  It  does  not  give  Shantung  back  to 
China.  By  being  parties  to  that  arrangement 
we  can  insist  upon  the  promise  of  Japan — the 
promise  which  the  other  Governments  have 
not  matched— that  she  will  return  to  China 
immediately  all  the  sovereign  rights  within 
the  Province  of  Shantung.  We  have  got  that 
for  her  now,  and  under  the  operations  of  Arti- 
cle Eleven  and  of  Article  Ten,  it  will  be  im- 
possible for  any  nation  to  make  any  further 
inroads,  either  upon  the  territorial  integrity 
or  upon  the  political  independence  of  China. 
If  you  are  China’s  friend  then  put  her  in  a po- 
sition where  even  the  concessions  which  have 
been  made,  need  not  be  carried  out.  I am  for 
helping  China  and  not  for  turning  away  from 
the  only  way  in  which  I can  help  her.  Those 
are  the  facts  about  Shantung.  Does  the  thing 
not  look  a little  different?1 


TheDepartmentof  Stateinformsme  it  understandsall Japan- 
ese troops  were  withdrawn  from  Shantung  in  December  1922. 
This  corroborates  Mr.  Wilson’s  sentences  that  Japan  would 
fulfill  her  withdrawal  pledge.  H.  F. 

[ 120  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 


RESERVATIONS 

The  only  thing  that  disturbs  me,  about  the 
form  which  the  opposition  to  the  League  is 
taking  is  this:  Certain  reservations  as  they  are 
called,  are  proposed  which  in  effect  amount  to 
this — that  the  United  States  is  unwilling  to 
assume  the  same  obligations  under  the  Cove- 
nant of  the  League  as  are  assumed  by  the 
other  members  of  the  League;  that  the  United 
States  wants  to  disclaim  any  part  in  the  re- 
sponsibility which  the  other  members  of  the 
League  are  assuming. 

I want  you  to  have  a very  clear  idea  of  what 
is  meant  by  reservations.  Reservations  are  to 
all  intents  and  purposes  equivalent  to  amend- 
ments. What  does  a reservation  mean?  It 
means  a stipulation  that  this  particular  gov- 
ernment insists  upon  interpreting  its  duty 
under  that  Covenant  in  a special  way,  insists 
upon  interpreting  it  in  a way  in  which  other 
governments,  it  may  be,  do  not  interpret  it. 

If  all  that  you  desire  is  to  say  what  you  un- 
derstand this  to  mean,  no  harm  can  be  done 
by  saying  it;  but  if  you  want  to  change  the 
Treaty,  if  you  want  to  alter  the  phraseology  so 
that  the  meaning  is  altered,  if  you  want  to  put 
in  reservations  which  give  the  United  States  a 
position  of  special  privilege  or  a special  ex- 
emption from  responsibility  among  the  mem- 

[ 121  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

bers  of  the  League,  then  it  will  be  necessary  to 
take  the  Treaty  back  to  the  conference  table, 
and  the  world  is  not  in  a temper  to  discuss 
this  Treaty  over  again. 

This  thing  when  we  ratify  it,  is  a contract. 
You  cannot  alter  so  much  as  the  words  of  a 
contract  without  the  consent  of  the  other 
parties.  Any  reservation  will  have  to  be  car- 
ried to  all  the  other  signatories,  Germany  in- 
cluded, and  we  shall  have  to  get  the  consent 
of  Germany,  among  the  rest,  to  read  this 
Covenant  in  some  special  way  in  which  we 
prefer  to  read  it  in  the  interest  of  the  safety  of 
America. 

In  order  to  put  this  matter  in  such  a shape 
as  will  lend  itself  to  concrete  illustration,  let 
me  show  you  what  I understand  is  a proposed 
form  of  reservation: 

“The  United  States  assumes  no  obligation 
under  the  provisions  of  Article  Ten  to  pre- 
serve the  territorial  integrity  or  political  inde- 
pendence of  any  other  country  or  to  interfere 
in  controversies  between  other  nations,  wheth- 
er members  of  the  League  or  not,  or  to  employ 
the  military  and  naval  forces  of  the  United 
States  under  any  article  of  the  Treaty  for  any 
purpose,  unless  in  any  particular  case  the 
Congress,  which  under  the  Constitution,  has 
the  sole  power  to  declare  war  or  authorize  the 
employment  of  the  military  and  naval  forces 

[ 122  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

of  the  United  States,  shall  by  act  or  joint  reso- 
lution so  declare.” 

In  other  words,  what  this  proposes  is  this: 
That  we  should  make  no  general  promise,  but 
leave  the  nations  associated  with  us  to  guess 
in  each  instance  what  we  were  going  to  con- 
sider ourselves  bound  to  do.  We  will  not  as- 
sume any  obligations.  We  will  not  promise 
anything,  but  from  time  to  time  we  may  co- 
operate. Does  the  United  States  want  to  say 
to  the  nations  with  whom  it  stood  in  this 
great  struggle,  “We  have  seen  you  through  on 
the  battlefield,  but  now  we  are  done.  We  are 
not  going  to  stand  by  you!” 

Every  war  of  any  consequence  that  you  can 
cite,  originated  in  an  attempt  to  seize  the  ter- 
ritory or  interfere  with  the  political  indepen- 
dence of  some  other  nation.  We  went  into  this 
war  with  the  sacred  promise  that  we  regarded 
all  nations  as  having  the  same  rights,  whether 
they  were  weak  or  strong,  and  unless  we  en- 
gage to  sustain  the  weak  we  have  guaranteed 
that  the  strong  will  prevail;  we  have  guaran- 
teed that  the  imperialistic  enterprise  will  re- 
vive; we  have  guaranteed  that  there  is  no  bar- 
rier to  the  ambition  of  nations  that  have  the 
power  to  dominate;  we  have  abdicated  the 
whole  position  of  right  and  substituted  the 
principle  of  might.  That  is  the  heart  of  the 
Covenant,  and  what  are  these  gentlemen 

[ 1 23  1 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

afraid  of?  Nothing  can  be  done  under  that  ar- 
ticle of  the  Treaty  without  the  consent  of  the 
United  States.  In  every  case  where  the  League 
takes  action  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  coun- 
cil of  the  League  is  necessary;  the  United 
States  is  a permanent  member  of  the  council 
of  the  League,  and  its  affirmative  vote  is  in 
every  case  necessary  for  every  affirmative,  or 
for  that  matter  every  negative  action;  so  that 
neither  the  United  States  nor  any  other  coun- 
try can  be  advised  to  go  to  war  for  the  re- 
demption of  that  promise  without  the  concur- 
rent affirmative  vote  of  the  United  States.  If 
we  cannot  be  obliged  to  do  anything  that  we 
do  not  ourselves  vote  to  do,  why  qualify  our 
acceptance  of  a perfectly  safe  agreement? 

Yet  I hear  gentlemen  say  that  this  is  an  in- 
vasion of  our  sovereignty.  If  it  is  anything  it 
is  an  exaggeration  of  our  sovereignty,  because 
it  puts  our  sovereignty  in  a way  to  put  a veto 
on  that  advice  being  given  to  anybody.  If  you 
want  to  keep  your  own  boys  at  home  after 
this  terrible  experience,  you  will  see  that  other 
boys  elsewhere  are  kept  at  home.  Our  present 
sovereignty  merely  extends  to  making  choice 
whether  we  will  go  to  war  or  not,  but  this  ex- 
tends our  sovereignty  to  saying  whether  other 
nations  shall  go  to  war  or  not.  If  that  does  not 
constitute  a very  considerable  insurance 
against  war,  I would  like  somebody  to  write  a 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

provision  which  would!  Because  America  is 
not  going  to  refuse,  when  the  other  catas- 
trophe comes,  again  to  attempt  to  save  the 
world,  and  having  given  this  proof  once,  I 
pray  God  that  we  may  not  be  given  occasion 
to  prove  it  again.  We  went  into  this  war 
promising  every  loving  heart  in  this  country 
who  had  parted  with  the  beloved  youngster 
that  we  were  going  to  fight  a war  which  would 
make  that  sacrifice  unnecessary  again  and  we 
must  redeem  that  promise  or  be  of  all  men 
the  most  unfaithful. 

There  is  no  necessity  for  the  last  part  of  this 
reservation.  Every  public  man,  every  states- 
man, in  the  world  knows,  and  I say  that  ad- 
visedly, that  in  order  that  the  United  States 
should  go  to  war  it  is  necessary  for  the  Con- 
gress to  act.  They  do  not  have  to  be  told  that, 
but  that  is  not  what  this  resolution  says.  This 
resolution  says  that  the  United  States  as- 
sumes no  obligation  under  the  provisions  of 
Article  Ten  to  preserve  the  territorial  integ- 
rity or  the  political  independence  of  any  other 
country — washes  its  hands  of  the  whole  busi- 
ness; says,  “We  do  not  want  even  to  create 
the  presumption  that  we  will  do  the  right 
thing.  We  do  not  want  to  be  committed  even 
to  a great  principle,  but  we  want  to  say  that 
every  time  a case  arises  the  Congress  will  in- 
dependently take  it  up  as  if  there  were  no  cove- 

[ 125  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

nant  and  determine  whether  there  is  any  moral 
obligation;  and  after  determining  that,  deter- 
mining whether  it  will  act  upon  that  moral 
obligation  or  not,  it  will  act.”  In  other  words, 
that  is  an  absolute  withdrawal  from  the  obli- 
gations of  Article  Ten.  It  means  the  rejection 
of  the  Treaty,  nothing  less.  It  means  that  the 
United  States  would  take  from  under  the 
structure  its  very  foundations  and  support. 

INTERPRETATIONS 

It  has  been  suggested  in  public  debate  and  in 
private  conference,  that  interpretations  of  the 
sense  in  which  the  United  States  accepts  the 
engagements  of  the  Covenant  should  be  em- 
bodied in  the  instrument  of  ratification.  There 
can  be  no  reasonable  objection  to  such  inter- 
pretations accompanying  the  act  of  ratifica- 
tion, provided  they  do  not  form  a part  of  the 
formal  ratification  itself.  Speaking  now  of 
those  which  some  men  of  high  conscience  and 
of  high  public  purpose  are  seriously  pressing 
in  order  that  there  may  be  no  misunderstand- 
ing. It  is  perfectly  feasible,  if  we  put  interpre- 
tations upon  that  Treaty  which  its  language 
clearly  warrants,  to  notify  the  other  govern- 
ments of  the  world  that  we  do  understand  the 
Treaty  in  that  sense.  It  is  perfectly  feasible  to 
do  that,  and  perfectly  honorable  to  do  that, 
because,  mark  you,  nothing  can  be  done  under 

[ 126  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

this  Treaty  through  the  instrumentality  of  the 
council  of  the  League  of  Nations  except  by  a 
unanimous  vote.  The  vote  of  the  United 
States  will  always  be  necessary,  and  it  is  per- 
fectly legitimate  for  the  United  States  to  noti- 
fy the  other  governments  beforehand  that  its 
vote  in  the  council  of  the  League  of  Nations 
will  be  based  upon  such  and  such  an  under- 
standing of  the  provisions  of  the  Treaty.  You 
can  avoid  a misunderstanding  without  quali- 
fying the  terms  of  the  document,  because  as  I 
have  said  and  shall  say  again  and  again, 
America  is  at  liberty  as  one  of  the  voting 
members  of  the  partnership  to  state  how  she 
understands  the  articles  of  partnership. 

THE  BROAD  SCOPE  OF  THE  LEAGUE 
I want  to  point  out  to  you  what  apparently 
has  escaped  the  attention  of  some  of  the  crit- 
ics of  the  League  of  Nations  that  the  heart  of 
the  League  of  Nations  Covenant  does  not  lie 
in  any  of  the  portions  which  have  been  dis- 
cussed in  public  debate.  You  would  think  it 
just  had  three  or  four  articles  in  it  to  hear 
some  men  talk  about  it.  Well,  there  are  twen- 
ty-six articles  altogether,  and  all  of  them  are 
about  something  else. 

I want  you  to  realize  just  what  the  Cove- 
nant of  the  League  of  Nations  means,  because 
in  so  many  parts  of  the  country  men  are 

[ 127  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

drawing  attention  to  little  details  in  a way 
that  destroys  the  whole  perspective  of  the 
great  plan,  in  a way  that  concentrates  atten- 
tion upon  certain  particulars. 

I am  going  to  take  the  liberty  of  reading 
you  a list  of  the  things  which  the  nations  ad- 
hering to  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Na- 
tions undertake.  I want  to  say  by  way  of 
preface  that  it  seems  to  me,  and  I am  sure  it 
will  seem  to  you,  not  only  an  extraordinarily 
impressive  list,  but  a list  which  was  never 
proposed  for  the  counsels  of  the  world  be- 
fore. 

It  provides  for  the  destruction  of  autocratic 
power  as  an  instrument  of  international  con- 
trol, admitting  only  self-governing  nations  to 
the  League  of  Nations.  Had  you  ever  been 
told  that  before?  No  nation  is  admitted  to  the 
League  of  Nations  whose  people  do  not  con- 
trol its  government.  That  is  the  reason  that 
we  are  making  Germany  wait.  She  says  that 
henceforth  her  people  are  going  to  control  her 
government,  but  we  have  got  to  wait  and  see. 
If  they  do  control  it  she  is  as  welcome  to  the 
League  as  anybody  else,  because  we  are  not 
holding  nations  off.  We  are  holding  selfish 
groups  of  men  off.  We  are  not  saying  to  peo- 
ples, “We  do  not  want  to  be  your  comrades 
and  serve  you  along  with  the  rest  of  our  fel- 
low beings,”  but  we  are  saying,  “It  depends 

[ 128  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

upon  your  attitude;  if  you  take  charge  of  your 
own  affairs,  then  come  into  the  game  and  wel- 
come.” The  League  of  Nations  sends  auto- 
cratic governments  to  Coventry.  That  is  the 
first  point. 

It  provides  for  the  substitution  of  publicity, 
discussion  and  arbitration  for  war.  That  is  the 
Supreme  thing  that  it  does. 

Instead  of  using  force  after  this  period  of 
discussion  something  very  much  more  effec- 
tive than  force  is  proposed,  namely,  an  abso- 
lute boycott  of  the  nation  that  does  not  keep 
its  covenant,  and  when  I say  an  absolute  boy- 
cott, I mean  an  absolute  boycott. 

It  provides  for  placing  the  peace  of  the 
world  under  constant  international  oversight, 
in  recognition  of  the  principle  that  the  peace 
of  the  world  is  the  legitimate  and  immediate 
interest  of  every  nation. 

It  provides  for  disarmament  on  the  part  of 
the  great  fighting  nations  of  the  world. 

It  provides  in  detail  for  the  rehabilitation 
of  oppressed  peoples,  and  that  will  remove 
most  of  the  causes  of  war. 

It  provides  that  there  shall  be  no  more  an- 
nexations of  territory  anywhere,  but  that 
those  territories  whose  people  are  not  ready 
to  govern  themselves  shall  be  intrusted  to  the 
trusteeship  of  the  nations  that  can  take  care 
of  them,  the  trustee  nation  to  be  responsible 

[ 129  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

in  annual  report  to  the  League  of  Nations; 
that  is  to  say,  to  mankind  in  general,  subject 
to  removal  and  restricted  in  respect  to  any- 
thing that  might  be  done  to  that  population 
which  would  be  to  the  detriment  of  the  popu- 
lation itself.  So  that  you  cannot  go  into  dark- 
est Africa  and  make  slaves  of  those  poor  peo- 
ple, as  some  governments  at  times  have  done. 

It  abolishes  enforced  labor.  It  takes  the 
same  care  of  the  women  and  children  of  those 
unschooled  races  that  we  try  to  take  of  the 
women  and  children  of  ours. 

It  provides  that  every  secret  treaty  shall  be 
invalid.  It  sweeps  the  table  of  all  private  un- 
derstandings and  enforces  the  principle  that 
there  shall  be  no  private  understandings  of 
any  kind  that  anybody  is  bound  to  respect. 

It  provides  for  the  protection  of  dependent 
peoples. 

It  provides  that  high  standards  of  labor, 
such  as  are  observed  in  the  United  States, 
shall  be  extended  to  the  working  man  every- 
where in  the  world. 

It  organizes  a new  method  of  cooperation 
among  all  the  great  Red  Cross  societies  of  the 
world.  That  simple  red  cross  has  come  to 
mean  to  the  world  more  than  it  ever  meant 
before.  Everywhere  in  the  remotest  recesses 
of  the  world — there  are  people  who  wear  that 
symbol,  and  every  time  I look  at  it,  I feel  like 

[ 13°  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

taking  off  my  hat,  as  if  I had  seen  a symbol  of 
the  world’s  heart.  This  Treaty  is  nothing  less 
than  an  organization  of  liberty  and  mercy  for 
the  world.  "It  provides  that  all  the  great  hu- 
mane instrumentalities,  like  the  conventions 
against  the  opium  trade,  like  the  regulation  of 
the  liquor  traffic  with  debased  and  ignorant 
people,  like  the  prohibition  of  the  selling  of 
arms  and  ammunition  to  people  who  can  use 
them  only  to  their  own  detriment,  shall  be 
under  the  common  direction  and  control  of 
the  League  of  Nations. 

That  is  the  League  of  Nations.  Nothing  can 
be_discussed  there  that  concerns  our  domestic 
affairs.\  Nothing  can  be  discussed  there  that 
concerns  the  domestic  affairs  of  any  other  peo- 
ple unless  something  is  occurring  in  some  na- 
tion which  is  likely  to  disturb  the  peace  of  the 
world,  and  any  time  that  any  question  arises 
which  is  likely  to  disturb  the  peace  of  the 
world,  then  the  Covenant  makes  it  the  right 
of  any  member,  strong  or  weak,  big  or  little  of 
that  universal  concert  of  the  nations  to  bring 
that  matter  up  for  clarification  and  discussion. 
We  shall  not  be  drawn  into  wars;  we  shall  be 
drawn  into  consultation,  and  we  will  be  the 
most  trusted  adviser  in  the  whole  group.  Con- 
sultation, discussion,  is  written  all  over  the 
whole  face  of  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of 
Nations,  for  the  heart  of  it  is  that  the  nations 

[ I3I  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

promise  not  to  go  to  war  until  they  have  con- 
sulted, until  they  have  discussed,  until  all  the 
facts  in  the  controversy  have  been  laid  before 
the  court  which  represents  the  common  opin- 
ion of  mankind.  Can  you  imagine  anything 
more  calculated  to  put  war  off",  not  only  to 
put  it  off",  but  to  make  it  violently  improbable  ? 

That  being  the  case,  it  becomes  sheer  non- 
sense to  talk  about  a supergovernment  being 
set  up  over  the  United  States;  it  becomes 
sheer  nonsense  to  say  any  authority  is  consti- 
tuted which  can  order  our  armies  to  other 
parts  of  the  world,  which  can  interfere  with 
our  domestic  questions,  which  can  direct  our 
international  policy  even  in  any  matter  in 
which  we  do  not  consent  to  be  directed.  We 
would  be  under  our  own  direction  just  as 
much  under  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of 
Nations  as  we  are  now. 

Of  course,  I do  not  mean  to  say  that  we  do 
not,  so  to  say,  pool  our  moral  issues.  We  do 
that.  In  acquiescing  in  the  Covenant  of  the 
Leagffe-we  do  adopt,  as  we  should  adopt,  cer- 
tain fundamental  moral  principles  of  right 
and  justice,  which  I dare  say,  we  do  not  need 
to  promise  to  live  up  to,  but  which  we  are  cer- 
tainly proud  to  promise  to  live  up  to.  We  are 
not  turning  any  corner.  We  always  have  lived 
up  to  them,  and  we  do  not  intend  to  change 
our  course  of  action  or  our  standards  of  ac- 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

tion.  And  it  is  American  standards  of  action 
that  are  set  up  in  the  Covenant  of  the  League 
of  Nations. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  LEAGUE 
There  seems  to  have  arisen  an  idea  in  some 
quarters  that  the  League  of  Nations  is  an  idea 
recently  conceived,  conceived  by  a small  num- 
ber of  persons,  somehow  originated  by  the  Am- 
erican representatives  at  the  council  table  in 
Paris.  You  have  been  led  to  believe  that  the 
Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations  is  in  some 
sense  a private  invention.  It  is  not  always 
said  of  whom,  and  I need  not  mention  who  is 
suspected!  It  is  supposed  that  out  of  some 
sort  of  personal  ambition  or  party  intention, 
an  authorship,  an  origination,  is  sought.  Noth- 
ing could  be  further  from  the  truth.  I would 
not  feel  the  confidence  that  I feel  in  the 
League  of  Nations  if  I felt  that  it  was  so  recent 
and  novel  a growth  and  birth  as  that.  Just  as 
there  was  in  xAmerica  a league  to  enforce  peace, 
which  even  formulated  a constitution  for  the 
league  of  peace  before  the  conference  met,  be- 
fore the  conference  was  thought  of,  before  the 
war  began,  so  there  were  in  Great  Britain,  and 
in  France,  and  in  Italy,  and,  I believe,  even 
in  Germany,  similar  associations  of  equally 
influential  men,  whose  ideal  was  that  some 
time  there  might  come  an  occasion  when  men 

[ 133  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

would  be  sane  enough  and  right  enough  to  get 
together  to  do  a thing  of  this  great  sort.  I wish 
that  I could  claim  the  great  distinction  of 
having  invented  this  great  idea,  but  it  is  a 
great  idea  which  has  been  growing  in  the 
minds  of  all  generous  men  for  several  genera- 
tions. Several  generations?  Why,  it  has  been 
the  dream  of  the  friends  of  humanity  through 
all  the  ages,  and  now  for  the  first  time  a great 
body  of  practical  statesmen,  immersed  in  all 
the  business  of  individual  nations,  gets  to- 
gether and  realizes  the  dream  of  honest  men. 
I wish  that  I could  claim  some  originative 
part  in  so  great  an  enterprise,  but  I cannot.  I 
had  the  great  privilege  of  being  the  spokes- 
man of  this  splendid  Nation  at  this  critical 
period  in  her  history,  but  I was  her  spokes- 
man, not  my  own,  and  when  I advocated  the 
things  that  are  in  this  League  of  Nations  I 
had  the  full  and  proud  consciousness  that  I 
was  only  expressing  the  best  thought  of  my 
fellow  countrymen. 

The  only  things  that  I have  any  special 
personal  connection  with  in  the  League  of 
Nations  Covenant  are  things  that  I was  care- 
ful to  have  put  in  there  because  of  the  very 
considerations  which  are  now  urged.  I did 
have  a part  in  some  of  the  phraseology.  For 
example,  there  is  one  part  of  the  Covenant, 
the  principal  part  of  it,  where  it  speaks  of  ar- 

[ 134  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

bitration  and  discussion,  where  it  provides 
that  any  member  state,  failing  to  keep  these 
particular  covenants  shall  be  regarded  as 
thereby  ipso  facto  to  have  committed  an  act 
of  war  against  the  other  members.  The  way  it 
originally  read  was  “Shall  thereby  ipso  facto 
be  deemed  at  war  with  the  other  members,” 
and  I said,  “No,  I cannot  agree  to  that.  That 
provision  would  put  the  United  States  at  war 
without  the  consent  of  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States,  and  I have  no  right  in  this  part 
of  the  Covenant  or  any  other  part,  to  assent 
to  a provision  which  would  deprive  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States  of  its  free  choice 
whether  it  makes  war  or  not.”  There  and  at 
every  other  point  in  the  Covenant  where  it 
was  necessary  to  do  so,  I insisted  upon  lan- 
guage which  would  leave  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States  free,  and  yet  gentlemen  say  that— 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States  is  deprived 
of  its  liberty.  I fought  that  battle  and  won  it. 

It  is  not  necessary  for  them  to  fight  it  over 
again.  I was  the  spokesman  in  this  matter,  so 
far  as  I was  influential  at  all,  of  all  sorts  and 
kinds  of  Americans,  of  all  parties  and  factions 
in  America. 

EMINENT  REPUBLICANS  AND  THE  LEAGUE 

Some  of  the  greatest  spirits,  some  of  the  most 
instructed  minds  of  both  parties  have  been 

[ L35  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

devoted  to  this  great  idea  for  more  than  a 
generation.  When  I went  to  Paris  I was  con- 
scious that  I was  carrying  there  no  plan  which 
was  novel  either  to  America  or  to  Europe,  but 
a plan  which  all  statesmen  who  realized  the 
real  interests  of  their  people  had  long  ago 
hoped  might  be  carried  out  in  some  day  when 
the  world  would  realize  what  the  peace  of  the 
world  meant  and  what  were  its  necessary 
foundations.  I was  merely  the  spokesman  of 
thoughtful  and  of  hopeful  spirits  in  America. 

What  I want  everybody  in  every  American 
audience  to  understand  is  this — the  first  ef- 
fective impulse  toward  this  sort  of  thing  came 
from  America,  and  I want  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  it  came  from  some  of  the 
very  men  who  are  now  opposing  its  consum- 
mation. They  dreamed  the  dream  that  has 
now  been  realized.  They  saw  the  vision  twen- 
ty, twenty-five,  thirty  years  ago  which  all 
mankind  are  now  permitted  to  see.  I,  along 
with  thousands  of  my  fellow  countrymen,  got 
the  idea  twenty  years  ago,  chiefly  from  Re- 
publican public  men.  Take  men  like  ex-Sena- 
tor  Burton,  of  Ohio.  He  has  been  preaching  a 
League  of  Nations  for  twenty  years. 

Some  very  interesting  things  happened 
while  we  were  on  the  other  side  of  the  water. 
One  of  the  most  distinguished  lawyers  in  the 
United  States,  Mr.  Wickersham  of  New  York, 

[ 1 36  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

who  was  Attorney  General  in  Mr.  Taft’s  cab- 
inet, came  over  to  Europe — I am  told,  I did 
not  see  him  while  he  was  over  there — to  op- 
pose the  things  he  understood  the  American 
peace  commission  was  trying  to  accomplish, 
and  what  happened  to  Mr.  Wickersham  ? He 
was  absolutely  converted,  above  all  things 
else,  to  the  necessity  for  a League  of  Nations 
not  only,  but  for  this  League  of  Nations.  He 
came  back  to  the  United  States  and  has  ever 
since,  in  season  and  out  of  season,  been  preach- 
ing in  public  advocacy  of  the  adoption  of  this 
Covenant.  I need  not  tell  you  of  the  conspicu- 
ously fine  work  which  his  chief,  Mr.  Taft,  has 
been  doing  in  the  same  cause.1 

It  is  of  particular  importance  to  remember, 
at  this  moment  when  some  men  have  dared  to 
introduce  party  passion  into  this  discussion 
that  some  of  the  leading  spirits,  perhaps  I 
may  say  the  leading  spirits  in  the  conception 
of  this  great  idea  were  the  leading  figures  of 
the  great  Republican  party.  I say  that  not  be- 
cause it  seems  to  me  to  make  the  least  differ- 
ence among  Americans  in  a great  matter  like 
this,  which  party  such  things  come  from,  but 
because  I want  to  emphasize  in  every  discus- 
sion of  this  matter,  the  absolutely  non-parti- 
san character  of  the  Covenant  and  of  the 
Treaty.  I am  particularly  interested  to  have 

See  Appendix  D. 


[ 137  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

you  realize  there  is  no  politics  in  this  business, 
except  the  profoundly  important  politics  of 
civilization.  I would  be  ashamed  of  myself,  as 
I am  frankly  ashamed  of  any  fellow  country- 
man of  mine  who  does  it,  if  I discussed  this 
great  question  with  any  portion  of  my  thought 
devoted  to  the  contest  of  parties  and  the  elec- 
tions of  next  year.There  is  one  thing  that  is  so 
much  greater  than  being  a Republican  or  a 
Democrat  that  those  names  ought  never  to  be 
mentioned  in  connection  with,  and  that  is  be- 
ing an  American.  If  anybody  discusses  this 
question  on  the  basis  of  party  advantage,  I 
repudiate  him  as  a fellow  American;  and  in 
order  to  validate  what  I have  said,  I want  to 
make  one  or  two  quotations  from  representa- 
tives of  a party  to  which  I do  not  belong. 

The  first  I shall  make  from  a man  who  has 
for  a long  time  been  a member  of  the  United 
States  Senate.  In  May  1916,  just  about  two 
years  after  the  Great  War  began,  this  Sena- 
tor, at  a banquet  at  which  I was  myself  pres- 
ent, uttered  the  following  sentences: 

“I  know,  and  no  one  I think  can  know  bet- 
ter than  one  who  has  served  long  in  the  Sen- 
ate, which  is  charged  with  an  important  share 
of  the  ratification  and  confirmation  of  all 
treaties,  no  one  can,  I think,  feel  more  deeply 
'than  I do  the  difficulties  which  confront  us  in 
the  work  which  this  League — that  is  the  great 

[ ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

association  extending  throughout  the  country- 
known  as  the  League  to  Enforce  Peace — un- 
dertakes, but  the  difficulties  cannot  be  over- 
come unless  we  try  to  overcome  them.  I be- 
lieve much  can  be  done.  Probably  it  will  be 
impossible  to  stop  all  wars,  but  it  certainly  will 
be  possible  to  stop  some  wars,  and  thus  dimin- 
ish their  number.  The  way  in  which  this  prob- 
lem is  to  be  worked  out  must  be  left  to  this 
League  and  to  those  who  are  giving  this  great 
subject  the  study  which  it  deserves.  I know 
the  obstacles.  I know  how  quickly  we  shall  be 
met  with  the  statement  that  this  is  a danger- 
ous question  which  you  are  putting  into  your 
agreement,  that  no  nation  can  submit  to  the 
judgment  of  other  nations,  and  we  must  be 
careful  at  the  beginning  not  to  attempt  too 
much.  I know  the  difficulties  which  arise  when 
we  speak  of  anything  which  seems  to  involve 
an  alliance,  but  I do  not  believe  that  when 
Washington  warned  us  against  entangling  al- 
liances, he  meant  for  one  moment  that  we 
should  not  join  with  the  other  civilized  na- 
tions of  the  world  if  a method  could  be  found 
to  diminish  war  and  encourage  peace. 

“It  was  a year  ago,”  he  continues,  “in  de- 
livering the  chancellor’s  address  at  Union  Col- 
lege, I made  an  argument  on  this  theory,  that 
if  we  were  to  promote  international  peace  at 
the  close  of  the  present  terrible  war,  if  we  were 

[ L39  1 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

to  restore  international  law  as  it  must  be  re- 
stored, we  must  find  some  way  in  which  the 
united  forces  of  the  nations  could  be  put  be- 
hind the  cause  of  peace  and  law.  I said  then 
that  my  hearers  might  think  that  I was  pic- 
turing a Utopia,  but  it  is  in  the  search  for 
Utopias  that  great  discoveries  have  been 
made.  Not  failure,  but  low  aim  is  the  crime. 
This  League  certainly  has  the  highest  of  all 
aims  for  the  benefit  of  humanity,  and  because 
the  pathway  is  sown  with  difficulties  is  no 
reason  that  we  should  turn  from  it.” 

The  quotation  is  from  Hon.  Henry  Cabot 
Lodge. 

I read  another  quotation  from  one  of  the 
most  energetic,  practical  and  distinguished 
leaders  of  the  Republican  party: 

( “The  one  effective  move  for  obtaining  peace 
is  by  an  agreement  among  all  the  great  pow- 
ers in  which  each  should  pledge  itself  not  only 
to  abide  by  the  decisions  of  a common  tribu- 
nal but  to  back  its  decisions  by  force.  The 
great  civilized  nations  should  combine  by  sol- 
emn agreement  in  a great  world  league  for  the 
peace  of  righteousness;  a court  should  be  es- 
tablished. A changed  and  amplified  Hague 
Court  would  meet  the  requirements,  com- 
posed of  representatives  from  each  nation, 
whose  representatives  are  sworn  to  act  as 

[ H°  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

judges  in  each  case  and  not  in  a representa- 
tive capacity.” 

Now  that  is  Article  Ten.  He  goes  on  and 
says  this: 

“The  nations  should  agree  on  certain  rights 
that  should  not  be  questioned,  such  as  terri- 
torial integrity,  their  right  to  deal  with  their 
domestic  affairs,  and  with  such  matters  as 
whom  they  should  admit  to  citizenship.  All 
such  guarantee  each  of  their  number  in  pos- 
session of  these  rights.” 

A very  worthy  utterance  from  Theodore 
Roosevelt ! I am  glad  to  align  myself  with  such 
utterances  as  those.  I subscribe  to  every  word 
of  them : and  here  in  concrete  form  is  the  ful- 
fillment of  the  plan  which  they  advocate. 

It  is  the  greatest  process  of  international 
conference  and  of  international  discussion 
ever  conceived,  and  that  is  what  we  are  trying 
to  substitute  for  war.  That  is  what  we  must 
substitute  for  war.  In  other  words,  the  only 
way  we  can  prevent  the  unspeakable  thing 
from  happening  again  is  that  the  nations  of 
the  world  should  unite  and  put  an  irresistible 
force  behind  peace  and  order.  There  is  only 
one  conceivable  way  to  do  that,  and  that  is  by 
means  of  a League  of  Nations.  The  very  de- 
scription is  a definition  of  a League  of  Na- 
tions, and  the  only  thing  we  can  debate  now 
is  whether  the  nations  of  the  world  having 

[ 1 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

met  in  a universal  congress  and  formulated  a 
Covenant  as  the  basis  for  a League  of  Na- 
tions, we  are  going  to  accept  that  or  insist 
upon  another.  If  we  want  a League  of  Na- 
tions, we  must  take  this  League  of  Nations 
because  there  is  no  conceivable  way  in  which 
any  other  Leagueof  Nations  isobtainable.  I do 
not  find  any  man  anywhere  rash  or  bold 
enough  to  say  that  he  does  not  desire  a League 
of  Nations.  I only  find  men  here  and  there 
saying  that  they  do  not  desire  this  League  of 
Nations,  and  I want  to  ask  you  to  reflect  upon 
what  that  means;  and  in  order  to  do  that  I 
want  to  draw  a picture  for  you,  if  you  will  be 
patient  with  me,  of  what  occurred  in  Paris. 

In  Paris  were  gathered  the  representatives 
of  nearly  thirty  nations  from  all  over  the  civi- 
lized globe,  and  even  from  some  parts  of  the 
globe  which  in  our  ignorance  of  them  we  have 
not  been  in  the  habit  of  regarding  as  civilized, 
and  out  of  that  great  body  were  chosen  the 
representatives  of  fourteen  nations,  represent- 
ing all  parts  of  the  great  stretches  of  the  peo- 
ples of  the  world  which  the  conference  as  a 
whole,  represented.  The  representatives  of 
those  fourteen  nations  constituted  a commis- 
sion on  the  League  of  Nations. 

The  first  resolution  passed  by  the  Confer- 
ence of  Peace  in  Paris  was  a resolution  in  favor 


[ I42  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

of  a League  of  Nations,  setting  up  a commis- 
sion to  formulate  a League  of  Nations.  Itwas 
the  thought  foremost  in  the  mind  of  every 
statesman  there.  He  knew  that  his  errand  was 
in  vain  in  Paris  if  he  went  away  without 
achieving  the  formation  of  a League  of  Na- 
tions, and  that  he  dared  not  go  back  and  face 
his  people  unless  he  could  report  that  the 
efforts  in  that  direction  had  been  successful. 
That  commission  sat  day  after  day,  evening 
after  evening.  I had  the  good  fortune  to  be  a 
member  of  the  commission,  and  I want  to  tes- 
tify to  the  extraordinary  good  temper  in  which 
the  discussions  were  conducted.  I want  to  tes- 
tify that  there  was  a universal  endeavor  to 
subordinate  as  much  as  possible  international 
rivalries  and  conflicting  international  inter- 
ests and  come  out  upon  a common  ground  of 
agreement  in  the  interest  of  the  world.  I want 
to  testify  that  there  were  many  compromises, 
but  no  compromises  that  sacrificed  the  prin- 
ciple, and  that  although  the  instrument  as  a 
whole  represented  certain  mutual  concessions, 
it  is  a constructive  instrument  and  not  a neg- 
ative instrument.  I shall  never  lose,  as  long  as 
I live,  the  impression  of  generous,  high- 
minded,  statesmanlike  cooperation  which  was 
manifested  in  that  interesting  body.  It  in- 
cluded representatives  of  all  the  most  power- 


[ 143  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

ful  nations,  as  well  as  representatives  of  some 
of  those  that  were  less  powerful. 

I could  not  help  thinking  as  I sat  there  that 
the  representatives  of  Italy  spoke  as  it  were 
in  the  tones  of  the  long  tradition  of  Rome; 
that  we  heard  the  great  Latin  people  who  had 
fought,  fought,  fought  through  generation  af- 
ter generation  of  strife  down  to  this  critical 
moment,  speaking  now  in  the  counsels  of 
peace;  and  there  sat  the  prime  minister  of 
Greece — the  ancient  Greek  people — lending 
his  singular  intelligence,  his  singularly  high- 
minded  and  comprehensive  counsel,  to  the 
general  result.  There  were  the  representatives 
also  of  France,  our  ancient  comrade  in  the 
strife  for  liberty;  and  there  were  the  represen- 
tatives of  Great  Britain,  supposed  to  be  the 
most  ambitious,  the  most  desirous  of  ruling 
the  world  of  any  of  the  nations  of  the  world, 
cooperating  with  a peculiar  interest  in  the  re- 
sult, with  a constant  and  manifestly  sincere 
profession  that  they  wanted  to  subordinate 
the  interests  of  the  British  Empire,  which  ex- 
tended all  over  the  world,  to  the  common  in- 
terests of  mankind  and  of  peace. 

The  representatives  of  Great  Britain,  I may 
stop  to  speak  of  for  a moment.  There  were 
two  of  them.  One  of  them  was  Lord  Robert 
Cecil,  who  belongs  to  an  ancient  family  in 
Great  Britain,  some  of  the  members  of  which 

[ :44  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

— particularly  Lord  Salisbury  of  a past  gener- 
ation— had  always  been  reputed  as  most  par- 
ticularly keen  to  seek  and  maintain  the  advan- 
tage of  the  British  Empire;  and  yet  I never 
heard  a man  speak  whose  heart  was  evidently 
more  in  the  task  of  the  humane  redemption  of 
the  world  than  Lord  Robert  Cecil;  and  along- 
side of  him  sat  General  Smuts,  the  South  Af- 
rican Boer,  the  man  who  had  fought  Great 
Britain  so  successfully,  that  after  the  war  was 
over  and  the  Boers  nominally  defeated,  Great 
Britain  saw  that  the  wisest  thing  she  could  do 
was  to  hand  the  government  of  the  country 
over  to  the  Boers  themselves.  General  Botha 
and  General  Smuts  were  both  members  of  the 
peace  conference;  both  had  been  successful 
generals  in  fighting  the  British  arms.  Nobody 
in  the  conference  was  more  outspoken  in  criti- 
cizing some  aspects  of  British  policy  than 
General  Botha  and  General  Smuts,  and  Gen- 
eral Smuts  was  of  the  same  mind  with  Sir 
Robert  Cecil.  They  were  both  serving  the 
common  interests  of  free  peoples  everywhere. 

You  seem  to  see  a sort  of  epitome  of  the  his- 
tory of  the  world  in  that  conference.  There 
were  nations  that  had  long  been  subordinated 
and  suffering.  There  were  nations  that  had 
long  been  indomitably  free,  but,  nevertheless, 
not  so  free  that  they  could  really  accomplish 
the  objects  that  they  had  always  held  dear.  I 

[ H5  ] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

want  you  to  realize  that  this  conference  was 
made  up  of  many  kinds  and  of  many  nations 
and  of  many  traditions,  keen  to  the  same  con- 
clusion, with  a unanimity,  an  enthusiasm,  a 
spirit  which  speaks  volumes  for  the  future 
hopes  of  mankind.  Is  it  not  a great  vision, 
this  of  the  thoughtful  world  combined  for 
peace,  this  of  all  the  great  peoples  of  the  world 
associated  to  see  that  justice  is  done,  that  the 
strong  who  intend  wrong  are  restrained  and 
that  the  weak  who  cannot  defend  themselves 
are  made  secure? 

It  is  the  parliament  of  nations  at  last,  where 
everyone  is  under  covenant  himself  to  do 
right,  to  respect  and  preserve  the  territorial 
integrity  and  existing  political  independence 
of  the  others,  and  where  everyone  engages 
never  to  go  to  war  without  first  trying  to  set- 
tle the  matter  by  the  slow-cooling,  disinter- 
ested processes  of  discussion.  It  is  what  we 
have  been  striving  for  for  generation  after 
generation,  and  now  some  men  hesitate  to  ac- 
cept it  when  the  golden  thing  is  placed  in  their 
hand. 

What  are  we  debating  in  the  United  States? 
Whether  we  will  take  part  in  guiding  and 
steadying  the  world  or  not!  And  some  men 
hesitate!  It  is  the  only  country  in  the  world 
whose  leadership  and  guidance  will  be  ac- 
cepted! If  we  do  not  give  it  we  may  look  for- 

[ 146] 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 

ward  to  something  like  a generation  of  doubt 
and  disorder  which  it  will  be  impossible  to 
pass  through  without  the  wreckage  of  a very- 
considerable  part  of  our  slowly  constructed 
civilization. 

America  and  her  determinations  now  con- 
stitute the  balance  of  moral  force  in  the  world, 
and  if  we  do  not  use  that  moral  force  we  will 
be  of  all  peoples  the  most  derelict.  We  are  in 
the  presence  of  this  great  choice,  whether  we 
will  stand  by  the  mass  of  our  own  people  and 
the  mass  of  mankind. 


f H7  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD 
PROBLEMS 


WE  have  come  to  one  of  the  turning  points 
in  the  history  of  the  world,  and  what  I as 
an  American,  covet  for  this  great  country  is 
that,  as  on  other  great  occasions  when  man- 
kind’s fortunes  hung  in  a nice  poise  and  bal- 
ance, America  may  have  the  distinction  to  lead 
the  way. 

America  and  the  world  have  come  to  the 
point  where  they  must  make  one  of  the  most 
critical  choices  ever  made  by  great  bodies  of 
men  or  by  nations.  They  have  now  to  deter- 
mine whether  they  will  accept  the  one  chance 
that  has  ever  been  offered  to  insure  the  peace 
of  the  world. 

We  are  facing  a decision  now  in  which  we 
cannot  afford  to  make  a mistake.  We  must 
not  let  ourselves  be  deceived  as  to  the  gravity 
of  that  decision  or  as  to  the  implications  of 
that  decision.  It  will  mean  a great  deal  now, 
but  it  will  mean  infinitely  more  in  the  future. 
We  are  making  decisions  now  which  will  mean 
more  to  the  children  than  they  mean  to  us, 
and  as  we  care  for  the  future  generations,  we 
will  be  careful  to  make  the  right  decisions  as 
to  the  policy  of  the  United  States  as  one  of 

[ 149  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

the  factors  in  the  peace  of  the  world.  America 
has  to  do  at  this  moment  nothing  less  than  to 
prove  to  the  world  whether  she  has  meant 
what  she  has  said  in  the  past.  If  we  as  a nation 
indeed  mean  what  we  have  always  said,  that 
we  are  the  champions  of  human  right,  now  is 
the  time  when  we  shall  be  brought  to  the  test, 
the  acid  test,  as  to  whether  we  mean  what  we 
said  or  not. 

Party  politics  has  no  place  in  the  subject 
we  are  now  obliged  to  discuss  and  to  decide. 
Politics  in  the  wider  sense  has  a great  deal  to 
do  with  it.  The  politics  of  the  world,  the  policy 
of  mankind,  the  concert  of  the  methods  by 
which  the  world  is  to  be  bettered,  that  con- 
cert of  will  and  of  action  which  will  make 
every  nation  a nobler  instrument  of  Divine 
Providence — that  is  world  politics. 

I have  sometimes  heard  gentlemen  discuss- 
ing the  questions  that  are  now  before  us  with 
a distinction  drawn  between  nationalism  and 
internationalism.  It  is  very  difficult  for  me  to 
follow  their  distinction.  The  greatest  nation- 
alist is  the  man  who  wants  his  nation  to  be 
the  greatest  nation,  and  the  greatest  nation  is 
the  nation  that  penetrates  to  the  heart  of  its 
duty  and  mission  among  the  nations  of  the 
world.  With  every  flash  of  insight  into  the 
great  politics  of  mankind,  the  nation  that  has 
that  vision  is  elevated  to  a place  of  influence 

[ i5°  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

and  power  which  it  cannot  get  by  arms,  which 
it  cannot  get  by  commercial  rivalry,  which  it 
can  get  by  no  other  way  than  by  that  spiritual 
leadership  which  comes  from  a profound  un- 
derstanding of  the  problems  of  humanity. 

If  I am  a true  American  I will  study  the 
true  interests  of  America.  If  I am  a true  Amer- 
ican I will  have  the  world  vision  that  America 
has  always  had,  drawing  her  blood,  drawing 
her  genius,  as  she  has  drawn  her  people,  out  of 
all  the  great  constructive  peoples  of  the  world. 
A true  American  conceives  America  in  the  at- 
mosphere and  whole  setting  of  her  fortune 
and  her  destiny. 

You  know  when  this  nation  was  born  and 
we  were  just  a little  group — 3,000,000  people 
on  the  Atlantic  coast — how  the  nations  on  the 
other  side  of  the  water  and  the  statesmen  of 
that  day  watched  us  with  a certain  conde- 
scension, looked  upon  us  as  a sort  of  group  of 
hopeful  children  pleased  for  the  time  being 
with  the  conception  of  absolute  freedom  and 
political  liberty,  far  in  advance  of  the  other 
peoples  of  the  world  because  less  experienced 
than  they,  less  aware  of  the  difficulties  of  the 
great  task  that  they  had  accomplished.  As  the 
years  have  gone  by  they  have  watched  the 
growth  of  this  nation  with  astonishment  and 
for  a long  time  with  dismay.  They  watched  it 


[ I51  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

with  dismay  until  a very  interesting  and  sig- 
nificant thing  happened. 

They  have  seen  the  United  States  do  what 
no  other  nation  ever  did.  When  we  fought  the 
war  with  Spain  there  was  many  a cynical 
smile  on  the  other  side  of  the  water  when  we 
said  that  we  were  going  to  win  freedom  for 
Cuba  and  then  present  it  to  her.  When  we 
fought  Cuba’s  battle  for  her,  then  they  said, 
“Ah,  it  is  the  beginning  of  what  we  predicted. 
She  will  seize  Cuba,  and  after  Cuba,  what  she 
pleases  to  the  south  of  her.  It  is  the  beginning 
of  the  history  we  have  gone  through  our- 
selves.” They  ought  to  have  known;  they  set 
us  the  example!  When  we  actually  fulfilled  to 
the  letter,  our  promise  that  we  would  set  help- 
less Cuba  up  as  an  independent  government 
and  guarantee  her  independence — when  we 
carried  out  that  great  policy  we  astounded 
and  converted  the  world.  When  we  kept  that 
promise  and  proved  our  absolute  disinterest- 
edness, and  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  we 
had  beaten  Spain  until  she  had  to  accept  any- 
thing that  we  dictated,  paid  her  $20,000,000 
for  something  that  we  could  have  taken, 
namely,  the  Philippine  Islands,  all  the  world 
stood  at  amaze.  Then  began — let  me  repeat 
the  word  again — then  began  the  confidence  of 
the  world  in  America. 

I want  you  to  recall  the  circumstance  of 

[ U2  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

this  great  war  lest  we  forget.  We  must  not 
forget  to  redeem  absolutely  and  without  qual- 
ification the  promises  of  America  in  this  great 
enterprise.  The  principle  that  America  went 
into  this  war  for  was  the  principle  of  the 
equality  of  sovereign  nations.  Our  contention 
has  always  been,  in  international  affairs,  that 
we  should  deal  with  them  upon  the  principle 
of  the  absolute  equality  of  independent  sover- 
eignty. It  has  been  a matter  of  principle  with 
the  United  States  to  maintain  that  in  respect 
of  rights  there  was  not  and  should  be  no  dif- 
ference between  a weak  State  and  a strong 
State. 

I am  just  as  much  opposed  to  class  legisla- 
tion in  international  matters  as  in  domestic 
matters.  I do  not,  I tell  you  plainly,  believe 
that  any  one  nation  should  be  allowed  to 
dominate,  even  this  beloved  Nation  of  our 
own,  and  it  does  not  desire  to  dominate.  No 
sort  of  privilege  will  ever  be  permitted  in  this 
country.  It  is  a partnership  or  it  is  a mockery. 
It  is  a democracy,  where  the  majority  are  the 
masters,  or  all  the  hopes  and  purposes  of  the 
men  who  founded  this  government  have  been 
defeated  and  forgotten.  And  I am  of  the  same 
principle  in  international  affairs.  One  of  the 
things  that  gave  the  world  a new  and  bound- 
ing hope  was  that  the  great  United  States  had 
said  that  it  was  fighting  for  the  little  nation 

[ :53  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

as  well  as  the  great  nation;  that  it  regarded 
the  rights  of  the  little  nation  as  equal  to  its 
own  rights;  that  it  would  make  no  distinction 
between  free  men  anywhere;  that  it  was  not 
fighting  for  a special  advantage  for  the  United 
States  but  for  an  equal  advantage  for  all  free 
men  everywhere. 

BREMEN  TO  BAGDAD 

Turn  your  thoughts  back  to  what  it  was  that 
Germany  proposed.  The  formula  of  Pan- 
Germanism  was  Bremen  to  Bagdad.  What  is 
the  line  from  Bremen  to  Bagdad?  It  leads 
through  partitioned  Poland,  through  pros- 
trated Roumania,  through  subjugated  Slavia 
down  through  disordered  Turkey,  and  on  into 
distressed  Persia,  and  every  foot  of  the  line  is 
a line  of  political  weakness.  Germany  was 
looking  for  the  line  of  least  resistance  to  es- 
tablish her  power,  and  unless  the  world  makes 
that  a line  of  absolute  resistance  this  war  will 
have  to  be  fought  over  again.  You  must  settle 
the  difficulties  which  gave  occasion  to  the  war 
or  you  must  expect  war  again.  You  know 
what  happened  all  through  that  territory.  Al- 
most everywhere  there  were  German  princes 
planted  on  thrones  where  they  did  not  belong, 
where  they  were  alien,  where  they  were  of  a 
different  tradition  and  a different  people, 
mere  agents  of  a political  plan,  the  seething 

[ 154] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

center  of  which  was  that  unhappy  city  of  Con- 
stantinople, where,  I dare  say,  there  was  more 
intrigue  to  the  square  inch  than  there  has 
ever  been  anywhere  else  in  the  world,  and 
where  not  the  most  honest  minds  always  but 
generally  the  most, adroit  minds  were  sent  to 
play  upon  the  cupidity  of  the  Turkish  auth- 
orities and  upon  the  helplessness  of  the  Bal- 
kan States,  in  order  to  make  a field  for  Euro- 
pean aggression.  I am  not  now  saying  that 
Germany  was  the  only  intriguer.  I am  not 
now  saying  that  hers  was  the  only  plan  of  ad- 
vantage, but  I am  saying  that  there  was  the 
field  where  lay  the  danger  of  the  world  in  re- 
gard to  peace. 

Germany  did  direct  her  first  force  against 
France  and  against  Belgium,  but  you  know 
that  it  was  not  her  purpose  to  remain  in 
France,  though  it  was  part  of  her  purpose  to 
remain  in  Belgium.  She  was  using  her  armies 
against  these  people  so  that  they  could  not 
prevent  what  she  intended  elsewhere,  and 
what  she  intended  elsewhere  was  to  make  an 
open  line  of  dominion  between  her  and  the 
Far  East.  The  formula  that  she  adopted  was 
Bremen  to  Bagdad,  the  North  Sea  to  Persia 
— to  crush  not  only  little  Serbia,  whom  she 
first  started  to  crush,  but  all  the  Balkan 
States,  get  Turkey  in  her  grasp,  take  all  the 
Turkish  and  Arabian  lands  beyond,  penetrate 

[155] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

the  wealthy  realms  of  Persia,  open  the  gates 
of  India,  and,  by  dominating  the  central  trade 
routes  of  the  world,  dominate  the  world  itself. 
That  was  her  plan.  The  Germans  were  travel- 
ling that  road.  The  merchants  and  manufac- 
turers and  bankers  of  Germany  were  making 
conquest  of  the  world.  All  they  had  to  do  was 
to  wait  a little  longer,  and  long  German  fin- 
gers would  have  been  stretched  all  through 
that  country  which  never  could  have  been 
withdrawn.  German  intrigue  was  penetrating 
all  those  countries  and  controlling  them. 
Their  general  staff  interrupted  the  game.  The 
war  spoiled  the  game. 

The  German  people  is  a great  educated  peo- 
ple. All  the  thoughtful  men  in  Germany,  so 
far  as  I have  been  able  to  learn,  who  were  fol- 
lowing peaceful  pursuits,  deemed  it  folly  to  go 
into  that  war.  They  said  so  then  and  they 
have  said  so  since.  The  business  men  of  Ger- 
many did  not  want  the  war  that  we  have 
passed  through.  The  bankers  and  the  manu- 
facturers and  the  merchants  knew  that  it  was 
unspeakable  folly.  Why?  Because  Germany, 
by  her  industrial  genius,  was  beginning  to 
dominate  the  world  economically,  and  all  she 
had  to  do  was  to  wait  for  about  two  more  gen- 
erations when  her  credit,  her  merchandise, 
her  enterprise,  would  have  covered  all  the 
parts  of  the  world  that  the  great  fighting  na- 

[ 156] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

tions  of  the  world  did  not  control.  But  they 
were  not  consulted.  The  masters  of  Germany 
were  the  general  military  staff;  it  was  these 
men  who  nearly  brought  a complete  cata- 
clysm upon  civilization  itself. 

And  now  look  what  has  happened:  Poland, 
Bohemia,  the  released  parts  of  Roumania, 
Jugo-Slavia — these  could,  none  of  them,  have 
won  their  own  independence  any  more  than 
Cuba  could  have  won  hers,  and  they  were 
under  an  authority  just  as  reckless  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  its  force,  just  as  regardless  of  the 
people  and  of  humanity  as  the  Spanish  Gov- 
ernment ever  was  in  Cuba  and  the  Philip- 
pines; and  by  the  force  of  the  world  these  peo- 
ple have  been  liberated.  All  down  through 
the  center  of  Europe  and  into  the  heart  of 
Asia  has  gone  this  process  of  liberation,  taking 
alien  yokes  off  the  necks  of  such  peoples  and 
vindicating  the  American  principle  that  you 
cannot  impose  upon  anybody  a sovereignty 
that  is  not  of  its  own  choice. 

Poland,  Czecho-Slovakia,  Roumania,  Jugo- 
slavia— all  those  nations  which  never  had  a 
vision  of  independent  liberty  until  now — have 
their  liberty  and  independence  guaranteed  to 
them.  We  are  giving  them  what  they  never 
could  have  got  with  their  own  strength,  what 
they  could  have  got  only  by  the  united  strength 
of  the  armies  of  the  world.  When  we  had  de- 

[ *57  J 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

termined  the  boundaries  of  Poland  we  set  it 
up  and  recognized  it  as  an  independent  Re- 
public. Poland  never  could  have  freed  herself. 
There  is  a Minister,  a diplomatic  representa- 
tive, of  the  United  States  at  Warsaw  right 
now  in  virtue  of  our  formal  recognition  of  the 
Republic  of  Poland. 

But  upon  Poland  center  some  of  the  dan- 
gers of  the  future.  South  of  Poland  is  Bohe- 
mia, in  all  her  veins  the  strongest  national  im- 
pulse that  was  to  be  found  anywhere  in  Eu- 
rope, which  we  cut  away  from  the  Austrian 
combination.  Below  Bohemia  is  Hungary 
which  can  no  longer  rely  upon  the  assistant 
strength  of  Austria;  below  her  is  an  enlarged 
Roumania.  Alongside  of  Roumania  is  the  new 
Slavic  Kingdom,  that  never  could  have  won 
its  own  independence,  which  had  chafed  under 
the  chains  of  Austria-Hungary,  but  never 
could  throw  them  off.  When  strategic  claims 
were  urged,  it  was  matter  of  common  counsel 
that  such  considerations  were  not  in  our 
thought;  we  were  not  arranging  for  future 
wars — we  were  giving  people  what  belonged 
to  them.  We  said,  “The  fundamental  wrongs 
of  history  center  in  those  regions.  These  peo- 
ple have  the  right  to  govern  their  own  govern- 
ment and  control  their  own  fortunes.” 

Now  the  world  is  waiting  to  hear  whether 
the  United  States  will  join  in  doing  for  them 

[ 158  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

what  it  sanely  did  for  Cuba,  guaranteeing 
their  freedom  and  saying  to  them,  “What  we 
have  given  to  you  no  man  shall  take  away.” 
It  is  our  final  heroic  test  of  character,  and  I, 
for  one,  have  not  the  slightest  doubt  as  to 
what  the  result  of  the  test  is  going  to  be,  be- 
cause I know  that  at  heart  this  people  loves 
freedom  and  right  and  justice  more  than  it 
loves  money  and  material  prosperity  or  any 
of  the  things  that  anybody  can  get  but  no- 
body can  keep  unless  they  have  elevation  of 
spirit  enough  to  see  the  horizons  of  the  des- 
tiny of  man.  When  we  came  into  existence  as 
a nation  we  promised  ourselves  and  we  prom- 
ised the  world  that  we  would  serve  liberty 
everywhere.  We  were  only  3,000,000  strong 
then,  and  shall  we,  when  more  than  a hundred 
million  strong,  fail  to  fulfill  the  promise  that 
we  made  when  we  were  weak  ? We  have  served 
mankind  and  we  shall  continue  to  serve  man- 
kind, for  I believe  that  we  are  the  flower  of 
mankind  so  far  as  civilization  is  concerned. 

CARING  FOR  WEAK  NATIONS 

I hear  some  gentlemen  say,  “Ah!  but  that  is 
altruistic.  It  is  not  our  business  to  take  care 
of  the  weak  nations  of  the  world.”  No,  but  it 
is  our  business  to  prevent  war,  and  if  we  do 
not  take  care  of  the  weak  nations  of  the  world, 
there  will  be  war.  These  gentlemen  assume 

[ 159] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

the  role  of  being  very  practical  men,  and  they 
say,  “We  do  not  want  to  get  into  war  to  pro- 
tect every  little  nation  in  the  world.”  Very 
well  then,  let  them  show  me  how  they  will 
keep  out  of  war  by  not  protecting  them,  and 
let  them  show  me  how  they  will  prove  that 
having  gone  into  an  enterprise,  they  are  not 
absolute  contemptible  quitters  if  they  do  not 
see  the  game  through.  They  joined  with  the 
rest  of  us  in  the  profession  of  fine  purpose 
when  we  went  into  the  war,  and  what  was  the 
fine  purpose  that  we  professed?  They  went  in, 
and  they  professed  to  go  in,  to  see  to  it  that 
nobody  after  Germany’s  defeat  should  repeat 
the  experiment  which  Germany  had  tried. 
And  how  do  they  propose  to  do  that  ? To  leave 
the  material  that  Germany  was  going  to  make 
her  dominating  empire  out  of,  helpless  and  at 
her  mercy.  You  cannot  set  weak  peoples  up  in 
independence  and  then  leave  them  to  be 
preyed  upon.  You  cannot  give  a false  gift. 
You  cannot  give  to  people  rights  which  they 
never  enjoyed  before  and  say,  “Now,  keep 
them  if  you  can.”  That  is  an  Indian  gift.  That 
is  a gift  which  cannot  be  kept.  If  you  have  a 
really  humane  purpose  and  a real  knowledge 
of  the  conditions  of  peace  in  the  world,  you 
will  have  to  say,  “This  is  the  settlement  and 
we  guarantee  its  continuance.” 

There  is  only  one  honorable  course  when 

[ 160] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

you  have  won  a cause,  to  see  that  it  stays  won 
and  nobody  interferes  with  or  disturbs  the 
results.  We  have  not  made  them  strong  by 
making  them  independent.  We  have  given 
them  what  I have  called  their  land  title.  By 
giving  them  their  land  titles  you  do  not  make 
them  any  stronger.  You  make  them  stronger 
in  spirit;  it  may  be  they  see  a new  day,  they 
feel  a new  enthusiasm,  their  old  love  of  their 
country  can  now  express  itself  in  action,  but 
physically  they  are  no  stronger  than  they 
were  before,  and  that  road  that  we  heard  so 
much  of — from  Bremen  to  Bagdad — is  wide 
open.  New  States,  one  after  another,  have 
been  set  up  by  the  action  of  the  conference  at 
Paris  all  along  the  route  that  was  intended  to 
be  the  route  of  German  dominion,  and  if  we 
now  merely  set  them  up  and  leave  them  in 
their  weakness  to  take  care  of  themselves, 
then  Germans  can  at  their  leisure,  by  intrigu- 
ing, by  every  subtle  process  of  which  they  are 
master,  accomplish  what  they  could  not  ac- 
complish by  arms,  and  we  will  have  abandoned 
the  people  whom  we  redeemed.  The  thing  is 
inconceivable;  the  thing  is  impossible.  If  you 
leave  that  road  open,  if  you  leave  those  na- 
tions to  take  care  of  themselves,  then  you  have 
committed  the  unpardonable  sin  of  undoing 
the  victory  which  our  boys  won.  If  the  results 
of  this  liberation  are  not  guaranteed,  then 

[ 161  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

they  will  fall  down  like  a house  of  cards.  You 
cannot  establish  freedom  without  force,  and 
the  only  force  you  can  substitute  for  an  armed 
mankind  is  the  concerted  force  of  the  com- 
bined action  of  mankind  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  all  the  enlightened  governments 
of  the  world.  This  is  the  only  conceivable  sys- 
tem that  you  can  substitute  for  the  old  order 
of  things  which  brought  the  calamity  of  this 
war  upon  us  and  would  assuredly  bring  the 
calamity  of  another  war  upon  us.  If  we  leave 
them  there  without  the  guaranty  that  the 
combined  force  of  the  world  will  assure  their 
independence  and  their  territorial  integrity, 
we  have  only  to  wait  a short  generation  when 
our  recent  experience  will  be  repeated.  We 
did  not  let  Germany  dominate  the  world  this 
time.  Are  we  then  ? 

That  guaranty  is  the  only  guarantee  against 
the  repetition  of  the  war  we  have  gone 
through  just  as  soon  as  the  German  nation, 
60,000,000  strong,  can  again  recover  its 
strength  and  its  spirit,  for  east  of  Germany 
lies  the  fertile  field  of  intrigue  and  power. 
There  is  no  conjecture  about  this.  Is  there  any 
man  who  does  not  know  that  the  seed  of  war 
in  the  modern  world  is  industrial  and  commer- 
cial rivalry?  The  real  reason  that  the  war  we 
have  just  finished  took  place  was  that  Ger- 
many was  afraid  her  commercial  rivals  were 

[ 162  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

going  to  get  the  better  of  her;  and  the  reason 
why  some  nations  went  into  the  war  against 
Germany  was  that  they  thought  Germany 
would  get  the  commercial  advantage  of  them. 
This  war  in  its  inception  was  a commercial 
and  industrial  war.  It  was  not  a political  war. 
The  seed  of  the  jealousy,  the  seed  of  the  deep- 
seated  hatred,  was  hot,  successful  commercial 
and  industrial  rivalry.  The  rivalries  of  this 
war  have  not  cooled.  The  passions  of  this 
world  are  not  dead.  They  have  been  rendered 
hotter  than  ever.  We  know  the  former  pur- 
poses of  German  intrigue  in  this  country,  and 
they  are  being  revived.  Why? 

We  have  not  reduced  very  materially  the 
number  of  the  German  people.  Germany  re- 
mains the  great  power  of  Central  Europe.  She 
has  more  than  60,000,000  people  now  (she  had 
nearly  70,000,000  before  Poland  and  other 
Provinces  were  taken  away).  You  cannot 
change  the  temper  and  expectations  of  a peo- 
ple by  five  years  of  war,  particularly  five  years 
of  war  in  which  they  are  not  yet  conscious  of 
the  wrong  they  did  or  of  the  wrong  way  in 
which  they  did  it.  They  are  expecting  the 
time  of  the  revival  of  their  power,  and  along 
with  the  revival  of  their  power  goes  their  ex- 
traordinary capacity,  their  unparalleled  edu- 
cation, their  great  capacity  in  commerce  and 
finance  and  manufacture. 

[ 163  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

At  this  moment,  the  only  people  who  are 
dealing  with  the  Bolshevist  Government  in 
Russia  are  the  Germans.  They  are  fraterniz- 
ing with  the  few  who  exercise  control  in  that 
distracted  country.  They  are  making  all  their 
plans  that  the  financing  of  Russia  and  the 
commerce  of  Russia  and  the  development  of 
Russia  shall  be  as  soon  as  possible  in  the  hands 
of  the  Germans;  and  just  as  soon  as  she  can 
swing  that  great  power,  that  is  also  her  road 
to  the  East  and  to  the  domination  of  the 
world. 


WORLD  IN  REVOLUTION 

What  does  not  seem  to  me  realized  in  this 
blessed  country  of  ours  is  the  fact  that  the 
world  is  in  revolution.  I do  not  mean  in  active 
revolution.  I do  not  mean  that  it  is  in  a state 
of  mind  that  will  bring  about  the  dissolution 
of  governments.  I mean  that  it  is  in  a state  of 
mind  which  may  bring  about  the  dissolution 
of  governments  if  we  do  not  enter  into  a world 
settlement  which  will  really  in  fact  and  in 
power  establish  justice  and  right.  In  every 
part  of  the  world,  not  excluding  our  own  be- 
loved country,  there  are  men  who  feel  that 
society  has  been  shaken  to  its  foundations, 
and  that  it  ought  to  have  been  shaken  to  its 
foundations,  in  order  that  men  might  be 
awakened  to  the  wrongs  that  had  been  done 

[ 164] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

and  were  continuing  to  be  done.  There  is  un- 
rest all  over  the  world.  The  unrest  is  not  due 
merely  to  the  fact  of  recent  extraordinary  cir- 
cumstances. 

There  is  not  now  a country  in  the  world 
where  the  great  mass  of  mankind  is  not  aware 
of  its  rights  and  determined  to  have  them  at 
any  cost,  and  the  present  universal  unrest  in 
the  world,  which  renders  return  to  normal 
conditions  impossible,  so  long  as  it  continues, 
will  not  stop  until  men  are  assured  by  some 
arrangement  they  can  believe  in  that  their 
rights  will  be  protected  and  that  they  can  go 
about  the  normal  production  of  the  neces- 
saries of  life  and  begin  to  enjoy  the  extraor- 
dinary pleasures  and  privileges  of  life  without 
the  constant  shadow  of  some  cloud  of  terror 
over  them,  some  threat  of  injustice,  some 
tyranny  of  control.  It  is  due  to  a universal 
conviction  that  the  conditions  under  which 
men  live  and  labor  are  unsatisfactory.  It  is  a 
conviction  all  over  the  world  that  there  is  no 
use  talking  about  political  democracy  unless 
you  have  also  industrial  democracy. 

You  know  what  this  war  interrupted  in  the 
United  States.  We  were  looking  closely  at  our 
own  methods  of  doing  business.  A great  many 
were  convinced  that  the  control  of  the  busi- 
ness of  this  country  was  in  too  few  hands. 
Some  were  convinced  that  the  control  of  the 

[ 165] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

credit  of  the  country  was  in  too  few  hands. 
Some  were  convinced  that  the  control  of  the 
credit  of  the  country  was  controlled  by  small 
groups  of  men,  and  the  great  Federal  Reserve 
Act  and  the  Great  Land  Bank  Act  were  passed 
in  order  to  release  the  resources  of  the  coun- 
try on  a broader  and  more  generous  scale.  We 
had  not  finished  dealing  with  monopolies.  We 
have  not  finished  dealing  with  monopolies. 
With  monopolies  there  can  be  no  industrial 
democracy.  With  the  control  of  the  few,  of 
whatever  kind  or  class,  there  can  be  no  democ- 
racy of  any  sort.  The  world  is  finding  that  out 
in  some  portions  of  it  in  blood  and  terror. 

THE  LESSON  OF  RUSSIA 

Look  what  has  happened  in  Russia.  I find 
wherever  I go  in  America  that  my  fellow  citi- 
zens feel  as  I do,  an  infinite  pity  for  that  great 
people,  an  infinite  longing  to  be  of  some  serv- 
ice to  them.  Everybody  who  has  mixed  with 
the  Russian  people  tells  me  that  they  are 
among  the  most  lovable  people  in  the  world, 
a very  gentle  people,  a very  friendly  people,  a 
very  simple  people,  and  in  their  local  life  a 
very  democratic  people  who  easily  trust  you 
and  who  expect  you  to  be  trustworthy  as  they 
are. 

I wish  we  could  learn  the  lesson  of  Russia 
so  that  it  would  be  burned  into  the  conscious- 

[ 1 66  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

ness  of  every  man  and  woman  in  /America. 
That  lesson  is  that  nobody  can  be  free  where 
there  is  not  public  order  and  authority.  What 
has  happened  in  Russia  is  that  an  old  and  dis- 
tinguished and  skillful  autocracy  has  had  put 
in  its  place  an  amateur  autocracy.  What  hap- 
pened in  Russia  was  not  a sudden  and  acci- 
dental thing.  The  people  of  Russia  were  mad- 
dened with  the  suppression  of  Czarism.  When 
at  last  the  time  came  to  throw  off  those  chains, 
they  threw  them  off,  at  first  with  hearts  full  of 
confidence  and  hope,  and  then  they  found  out 
that  they  had  been  again  deceived.  There  was 
an  assembly  chosen  to  frame  a constitution 
for  them  and  it  was  suppressed  and  dispersed, 
and  a little  group  of  men  just  as  selfish,  just  as 
ruthless,  just  as  pitiless  as  the  agents  of  the 
Czar  himself,  assumed  control  and  exercised 
their  power  by  terror  and  not  by  right. 

We  ourselves  are  in  danger  at  this  present 
moment  of  minorities  trying  to  control  our  af- 
fairs, and  whenever  a minority  tries  to  con- 
trol the  affairs  of  the  country  it  is  fighting 
against  the  interests  of  the  country  just  as 
much  as  if  it  were  trying  to  upset  the  govern- 
ment. I am  against  the  control  of  any  minor- 
ity anywhere.  Search  your  own  economic  his- 
tory and  what  have  you  been  uneasy  about  ? 
Now  and  again  you  have  said  that  there  were 
small  groups  of  capitalists  who  were  control- 

[ 167  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

ling  the  industry  and  therefore  the  develop- 
ment of  the  United  States.  If  that  is  so,  and 
sometimes  I have  feared  that  it  was,  we  must 
break  up  that  monopoly.  I am  not  now  saying 
that  there  is  any  group  of  our  fellow  citizens 
who  are  consciously  doing  anything  of  the 
kind.  I am  saying  that  these  allegations  must 
be  proved,  but  if  it  is  proved  that  any  class, 
any  group  anywhere,  is  without  the  suffrage 
of  their  fellow  citizens,  in  control  of  our  af- 
fairs, then  I am  with  you  to  destroy  the  power 
of  that  group.  We  have  got  to  be  frank  with 
ourselves  however;  if  we  do  not  want  minor- 
ity government  in  Russia,  we  must  see  that 
we  do  not  have  it  in  the  United  States.  If  you 
do  not  want  little  groups  of  selfish  men  to  plot 
the  future  of  Europe,  we  must  not  allow  little 
groups  of  selfish  men  to  plot  the  future  of 
America.  That  picture  is  before  the  eyes  of 
every  nation.  Shall  we  get  into  the  clutch  of 
another  sort  of  minority?  Any  man  that 
speaks  for  a class  must  prove  that  he  also 
speaks  for  all  his  fellow  citizens  and  for  man- 
kind, and  then  we  will  listen  to  him.  The 
most  difficult  thing  in  a democracy  is  to  get 
classes  where  they  unfortunately  exist  to  un- 
derstand one  another  and  unite,  and  yet  you 
have  not  got  a great  democracy  until  they  do 
understand  one  another  and  unite.  So  that  if 
we  are  in  for  seeing  that  there  are  no  more 

[ 1 68  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

Czars,  and  no  more  Kaisers,  then  let  us  do  a 
thorough  job  and  see  that  nothing  of  that 
sort  occurs  anywhere.  That  is  what  pitiful 
Russia  has  got  in  for,  and  there  will  be  many 
a year,  I am  afraid,  before  she  finds  herself 
again. 

Have  you  seen  no  symptoms  of  the  spread 
of  that  sort  of  chaotic  spirit  into  other  coun- 
tries? That  poison  is  running  through  the 
veins  of  the  world,  and  we  have  made  the 
methods  of  communication  throughout  the 
world  such  that  all  the  veins  of  the  world  are 
open  and  the  poison  can  circulate.  Do  you  not 
know  that  the  world  is  all  now  one  single 
whispering  gallery?  Those  antennae  of  the 
wireless  telegraph  are  the  symbols  of  our  age. 
All  the  impulses  of  mankind  are  thrown  out 
upon  the  air  and  reach  to  the  ends  of  the 
earth;  quietly  upon  steamships,  silently  under 
the  cover  of  the  Postal  Service,  with  the  tongue 
of  the  wireless,  and  the  tongue  of  the  tele- 
graph, all  the  suggestions  of  disorder  are 
spread  through  the  world.  The  dread  in  the 
mind  of  every  thoughtful  man  in  Europe  is 
that  that  distemper  will  spread  to  their  coun- 
tries, and  that  before  there  will  be  settled 
order  there  will  be  tragical  disorder.  There  is 
not  a statesman  in  Europe  who  does  not  dread 
the  infection  of  it,  and  just  as  certainly  as 
those  people  are  disconcerted,  thrown  back 

[ 169] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

upon  their  own  resources,  disheartened,  ren- 
dered cynical  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  only 
people  in  the  world  they  trust,  just  so  cer- 
tainly there  will  be  universal  upsetting  of 
order  in  Europe;  and  if  the  order  of  Europe  is 
upset,  do  you  think  America  is  going  to  be 
quiet? 

Have  you  heard  nothing  of  the  propaganda 
of  that  sort  of  belief  in  the  United  States? 
Does  any  body  of  Americans  think  that  none 
of  this  restlessness,  this  unhappy  feeling,  has 
reached  America?  Are  our  affairs  entirely  in 
order?  Do  you  find  everybody  about  you  con- 
tent with  our  present  industrial  order?  Do 
you  hear  of  no  intimations  of  radical  change? 
Do  you  learn  of  no  organizations,  the  object 
of  which  is  nothing  less  than  to  overturn  the 
government  itself?  There  is  only  one  way  to 
meet  radicalism  and  that  is  to  deprive  it  of 
food,  and  wherever  there  is  anything  wrong 
there  is  abundant  food  for  radicalism.  The 
only  way  to  keep  men  from  agitating  against 
grievances  is  to  remove  the  grievances,  and  as 
long  as  things  are  wrong  I do  not  intend  to 
ask  men  to  stop  agitating.  I intend  to  beg 
that  they  will  agitate  in  an  orderly  fashion;  I 
intend  to  beg  that  they  will  use  the  orderly 
methods  of  counsel,  and,  it  may  be,  the  slow 
processes  of  correction  which  can  be  accom- 
plished in  a self-governing  people  through  po- 

[ Wo  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

litical  means.  Otherwise  we  will  have  chaos; 
but  as  long  as  there  is  something  to  correct,  I 
say  Godspeed  to  the  men  who  are  trying  to 
correct  it.  That  is  the  only  way  to  meet  radi- 
calism. Radicalism  means  cutting  up  by  the 
roots.  Well  remove  the  noxious  growth  and 
there  will  be  no  cutting  up  by  the  roots.  We 
are  a self-possessed  nation.  We  know  the  value 
of  order.  We  mean  to  maintain  it.  We  will  not 
permit  any  minority  of  any  sort  to  dominate 
it,  but  it  is  rather  important  for  America  as 
well  as  for  the  rest  of  the  world,  that  this  in- 
fection should  not  be  everywhere  in  the  air, 
and  that  men  everywhere  should  begin  to 
look  life  and  facts  in  the  face  and  come  to 
calm  counsels  and  purposes  that  will  bring 
order  and  happiness  and  prosperity  again. 

OUR  PRESENT  TASKS 

The  tasks  of  peace  that  are  ahead  of  us  are  the 
most  difficult  to  which  the  human  genius  has 
ever  been  devoted.  We  have  to  re-regulate  the 
fortunes  of  men.  We  have  to  reconstruct  the 
machinery  of  civilization.  I use  the  words  de- 
liberately— we  have  to  reconstruct  the  ma- 
chinery of  civilization. 

The  problem  that  we  are  facing  in  the  high 
cost  of  living  is  the  end  and  the  beginning  and 
a portion  of  a world  problem,  and  the  great 
difficulty  just  now  is  in  getting  some  minds 

[ 171  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

adjusted  to  the  world.  One  of  the  difficulties 
that  are  being  encountered  is  not  prejudice  so 
much  but  that  thing  which  is  so  common  and 
so  inconvenient — just  downright  ignorance. 
Ignorance,  I mean,  of  the  state  of  the  world 
and  of  America’s  relation  to  the  state  of  the 
world.  We  cannot  change  that  relation.  It  is  a 
fact.  It  is  a fact  bigger  than  anybody  of  us, 
and  one  of  the  advantages  that  the  United 
States  has  it  ought  not  to  forfeit:  it  is  made  up 
out  of  all  the  thinking  peoples  of  the  world. 
We  come  from  all  the  great  races  of  the  world. 
We  are  made  up  out  of  all  the  nations  and 
peoples  who  have  stood  at  the  center  of  civili- 
zation. 

Sometimes  I feel  like  taking  off  my  hat  to 
some  of  those  immigrants.  I was  born  an 
American.  I could  not  help  it,  but  they  chose 
to  be,  Americans.  I honor  those  men.  I say, 
“You  made  a deliberate  choice  which  showed 
that  you  saw  what  the  drift  and  history  of 
mankind  was.”  We  are  made  up  out  of  the 
hard-headed,  hard-fisted,  practical  and  yet 
idealistic  and  forward-looking  peoples  of  the 
world,  and  we,  of  all  peoples,  ought  to  have  an 
international  understanding  and  ability  to 
comprehend  what  the  problem  is  and  what 
part  we  ought  to  play  in  that  problem. 

Every  other  nation  is  set  in  the  mold  of  a 
particular  breeding.  We  are  set  in  no  mold  at 

[ 172  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

all.  Every  other  nation  has  certain  preposses- 
sions which  run  back  through  all  the  ramifi- 
cations of  an  ancient  history.  We  have  noth- 
ing of  the  kind.  This  nation  draws  its  blood 
from  every  civilized  stock  in  the  world  and  is 
ready  by  sympathy  and  understanding  to 
understand  the  peoples  of  the  world,  their  in- 
terests, their  rights,  their  hopes,  their  destiny. 
America  is  the  only  nation  in  the  world  that, 
has  that  equipment.  We  are  the  people  of  all 
people  in  the  world  intelligently  to  discuss  the 
difficulties  of  the  nations  which  we  represent, 
although  we  are  Americans.  We  are  the  pre- 
destined mediators  of  mankind.  I am  not  say- 
ing this  in  any  kind  of  national  pride  or  van- 
ity. I believe  it  is  mere  historic  truth,  and  I 
try  to  interpret  circumstances  in  some  intelli- 
gent way.  If  that  is  the  kind  of  people  we  are, 
it  must  have  been  intended  that  we  should 
make  some  use  of  the  opportunities  and  pow- 
ers that  we  have. 

I hear  men  say,  “Let  us  stay  out  and  take 
care  of  ourselves  and  let  the  rest  of  the  world 
take  care  of  itself.  Why  should  we  rehabilitate 
the  world?”  I do  not  agree  with  that  from  the 
point  of  view  of  sentiment.  I would  be  asham- 
ed to  agree  with  it  from  the  point  of  view 
of  sentiment,  and  I think  I have  intelligence 
enough  to  know  that  it  would  not  work,  even 
if  I wanted  it  to  work. 

[ 173  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 


OUR  FOREIGN  TRADE 

Are  we  disconnected  from  the  rest  of  the 
world?  Take  a single  item.  If  Europe  is  dis- 
ordered, who  is  going  to  buy  wheat?  There  is 
more  wheat  in  this  country  than  we  can  con- 
sume. There  are  more  foodstuffs  in  this  coun- 
try of  many  sorts  than  we  can  consume.  Who 
is  going  to  change  the  circumstance  that  we 
argely  feed  the  rest  of  the  world?  Who  is  go- 
_ to  check  the  growth  of  this  nation  ? Who  is 
going  to  reduce  the  natural  resources  of  this 
country?  Who  is  going  to  change  the  circum- 
stance that  many  of  our  resources  are  unique 
and  indispensable?  If  you  want  to  trade  you 
have  got  to  have  somebody  to  trade  with.  If 
you  want  to  carry  your  business  to  the  ends 
of  the  world,  there  must  be  business  at  the 
ends  of  the  world  to  tie  in  with.  You  cannot 
trade  with  a world  disordered.  What  are  you 
going  to  do?  Give  up  your  foreign  markets? 
The  300,000,000  people  between  the  Rhine 
and  the  Ural  Mountains  will  be  in  such  a con- 
dition that  they  cannot  buy  anything,  their 
industries  cannot  start,  unless  they  surrender 
themselves  to  the  bankers  of  Mittel-Europa, 
that  you  used  to  hear  about;  and  the  peoples 
of  Italy  and  France  and  Belgium,  some  80,- 
000,000  strong,  who  are  your  natural  cus- 
tomers, cannot  buy  anything  in  disturbed  and 

[ 174  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

bankrupt  Europe.  You  cannot  get  those  mar- 
kets away  from  Germany  if  you  let  her  re- 
establish her  old  influence  there. 

I believe  that  with  the  exception  of  the 
United  States,  there  is  not  a country  in  the 
world  that  can  live  without  importation. 
There  are  only  one  or  two  countries  that  can 
live  without  imported  foodstuffs.  There  is 
hardly  an  European  nation  that  is  of  a fight- 
ing inclination,  which  has  enough  food  to  eat 
without  importing  food.  There  are  no  coun- 
tries that  I know  of  that  can  live  in  their  or- 
dinary way  without  importing  manufactured 
goods  or  raw  materials,  raw  materials  of  many 
kinds.  Is  there  any  business  man  who  would 
be  willing  to  see  the  world  go  bankrupt  and 
the  business  of  the  world  stop?  Is  there  any 
man  who  does  not  know  that  America  is  the 
only  nation  left  by  the  war  in  a position  to 
see  that  the  world  does  go  on  with  its  busi- 
ness ? I dare  say  you  read  the  statement  of  Mr. 
Herbert  Hoover’s  opinion,  an  opinion  which  I 
always  greatly  respect,  that  it  will  be  neces- 
sary for  the  United  States  to  advance  four  or 
five  billion  dollars  for  the  rehabilitation  of 
credit  and  industry  on  the  other  side  of  the 
water.  I think  the  statement  of  the  sum  a 
reasonable  and  conservative  statement.  If  we 
do  not  start  the  world  again,  then  we  check 
and  stop  to  that  extent  our  own  industries 

[ 175  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

and  our  own  exportation,  of  course.  If  you 
want  to  have  your  own  fortunes  held  steady, 
realize  that  the  fortunes  of  the  world  must  be 
held  steady.  If  the  business  of  the  world  lags 
your  industries  lag  and  your  prosperity  lags. 

REHABILITATION  OF  GERMANY 

What  is  our  own  business?  We  are  a great 
nation  but  the  Treaty  is  going  to  be  applied 
just  the  same  whether  we  take  part  in  it  or 
not.  What  is  one  of  the  central  features  of  the 
execution  of  this  Treaty?  It  is  the  application 
of  the  reparation  clauses.  Germany  cannot 
pay  for  this  war  unless  her  industries  are  re- 
vived, and  the  Treaty  of  Peace  sets  up  a great 
commission  known  as  the  Reparation  Com- 
mission, in  which  it  was  intended  that  there 
should  be  a member  from  the  United  States 
as  well  as  from  other  countries.  The  business 
of  this  Commission  will  be  in  part  to  see  that 
the  industries  of  Germany  are  revived  in  order 
that  Germany  may  pay  this  great  debt  which 
she  owes  to  civilization.  Not  only  that,  but 
you  know  we  used  to  have  a trade  with  Ger- 
many. All  of  that  trade  is  going  to  be  in  the 
hands  and  under  the  control  of  the  Repara- 
tion Commission.  I humbly  asked  leave  to  ap- 
point a member  to  look  after  our  interests, 
and  I was  rebuked  for  it.  I am  looking  after 
the  industrial  relations  of  the  United  States.  I 

[ 176] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

would  like  to  see  the  other  men  who  are.  They 
are  forgetting  the  industrial  interests  of  the 
United  States,  and  they  are  doing  things  that 
will  cut  us  off  and  our  trade  off  from  the  nor- 
mal channels,  because  the  Reparation  Com- 
mission can  determine  where  Germany  buys, 
what  Germany  buys,  how  much  Germany 
buys;  the  Reparation  Commission  can  deter- 
mine in  what  instruments  of  credit  she  tem- 
porally expresses  her  debt.  They  can  deter- 
mine how  those  instruments  of  credit  shall  be 
used  for  the  basis  of  the  credit  which  must 
underlie  international  exchange.  They  are  go- 
ing to  stand  at  the  center  of  the  financial  oper- 
ations of  the  world.  Now,  is  it  minding  our 
business  to  keep  out  of  that?  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  handing  our  business  over  to  people  who 
are  not  particularly  interested  in  seeing  that 
it  prospers.  At  every  point  we  shall  be  embar- 
rassed by  the  whole  financial  affairs  of  the 
world  being  in  the  hands  of  other  nations. 

I do  not  like,  in  debating  the  great  tradi- 
tions of  a free  people,  to  bring  the  debate 
down  to  the  basis  of  dollars  and  cents,  but  if 
you  want  to  bring  it  down  to  that,  if  anybody 
wants  to  bring  it  down  to  that,  reason  it  out 
on  that  line.  If  you  want,  as  some  of  our  fellow 
countrymen  insist,  to  dwell  upon  the  material 
side  of  it  and  our  interest  in  the  matter,  our 
commercial  interest,  draw  the  picture  for 

[ 177  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

yourselves.  The  strain  put  upon  the  finances 
of  the  other  governments  of  the  world  has 
been  all  but  a breaking  strain.  I imagine  that 
it  will  be  several  generations  before  foreign 
governments  can  finally  adjust  themselves  to 
carrying  the  overwhelming  debts  which  have 
been  accumulated  in  this  war.  The  United 
States  has  accumulated  a great  debt  but  not 
in  proportion  to  those  that  other  countries 
have  accumulated  when  you  reckon  our  wealth 
as  compared  with  theirs.  We  are  the  only  na- 
tion in  the  world  that  is  likely,  in  the  imme- 
diate future,  to  have  a sufficient  body  of  free 
capital  to  put  the  industrial  world  here  and 
elsewhere  on  its  feet  again.  I have  heard  Eu- 
rope spoken  of  as  bankrupt.  There  may  be 
great  difficulties  in  paying  the  public  debts, 
but  there  are  going  to  be  no  insuperable  diffi- 
culties to  re-beginning  the  economic  and  in- 
dustrial life  of  Europe.  The  men  are  there,  the 
materials  are  there,  the  energy  is  there,  and 
the  hope  is  there.  The  nations  are  not  crushed. 
They  are  ready  for  the  great  enterprises  of  the 
future,  and  it  is  for  us  to  choose  whether  we 
will  enter  those  great  enterprises  upon  a foot- 
ing of  advantage  and  of  honor  or  upon  a foot- 
ing of  disadvantage  and  distrust. 

The  other  nations  of  the  world  are  drawing 
together.  We,  who  suggested  that  they  should 
draw  together  in  this  new  partnership,  stand 

[ 178  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

aside.  We  at  once  draw  their  suspicion  upon 
us.  We  at  once  draw  their  intense  hostility 
upon  us.  We  at  once  renew  the  thing  that  had 
begun  to  be  done  before  we  went  into  the  war. 
There  was  a conference  in  Paris  not  many 
months  before  we  went  into  the  war  in  which 
the  nations  then  engaged  against  Germany 
attempted  to  draw  together  in  an  exclusive 
economic  combination  where  they  should 
serve  one  another’s  interest  and  exclude  those 
who  had  not  participated  in  the  war  from 
sharing  in  that  interest,  and  just  so  certainly 
as  we  stay  out,  every  market  that  can  possibly 
be  closed  against  us  will  be  closed.  If  you 
merely  look  at  it  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
material  prosperity  of  the  United  States,  we 
are  under  compulsion  to  stay  in  the  partner- 
ship. You  cannot  have  even  your  legitimate 
part  in  the  business  of  the  world  unless  you 
are  partners  with  the  rest.  Is  it  your  idea  that 
if  we  lend  our  money,  as  we  must,  to  men 
whom  we  have  bitterly  disappointed,  that 
money  will  bring  back  to  us  the  largess  to 
which  we  are  entitled?  Can  you  sell  more 
easily  to  a man  who  takes  your  goods  because 
he  cannot  do  without  them  or  to  a man  who 
wants  them  and  believes  them  the  best? 

We  are  told  that  we  are  strong  and  they  are 
weak;  that  we  still  have  economic  indepen- 
dence and  they  have  not.  What  does  that 

[ 179  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

mean?  That  means  that  they  went  into  the 
redemption  of  the  freedom  of  the  world  sooner 
than  we  did  and  gave  everything  that  they 
had  to  redeem  it;  and  now  we,  because  we  did 
not  go  in  so  soon  or  lose  so  much,  want  to 
make  profit  of  the  redeemers!  The  thing  is 
hideous.  The  thing  is  unworthy  of  every  tra- 
dition of  America.  I speak  of  it  not  because  I 
think  that  sort  of  thing  takes  the  least  hold 
upon  the  consciousness  or  the  purpose  of 
America,  but  because  it  is  a pleasure  to  con- 
demn so  ugly  a thing.  There  is  nothing  which 
can  more  certainly  put  a drop  of  acid  into 
every  relationship  we  have  in  the  world  than 
if  we  now  desert  our  former  associates  in  the 
war. 

You  can  bring  about  a state  of  mind  where- 
by every  device  possible,  foreign  markets  will 
be  closed  to  you  and  men  will  say,  “No,  the 
wheat  of  America  tastes  bitter;  we  will  eat  the 
wheat  of  Argentina;  we  will  eat  the  wheat  of 
Australia,  for  that  is  the  wheat  of  friendship, 
and  this  is  the  wheat  of  antagonism.  We  do 
not  want  to  wear  clothes  made  out  of  Ameri- 
can cotton:  we  are  going  to  buy  just  as  much 
cotton  from  India  as  we  can.  We  are  going  to 
develop  new  cotton  fields.  America  is  up  to 
something:  we  do  not  know  just  what,  and  we 
are  going  to  shut  and  lock  every  door  against 
her.”  You  can  get  the  world  in  that  temper. 

[ 180  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

Do  you  think  it  would  be  profitable?  You 
make  all  the  lines  of  trade  lines  of  resistance 
unless  you  prove  true  to  the  things  that  you 
have  attempted  and  undertaken.  Unless  you 
go  into  the  great  economic  partnership  with 
the  world,  you  have  the  rest  of  the  world  eco- 
nomically combined  against  you.  If  we  are 
partners,  let  me  predict  we  will  be  the  senior 
partner.  The  financial  leadership  will  be  ours. 
The  industrial  primacy  will  be  ours.  The  com- 
mercial advantage  will  be  ours.  If  we  are  in  it, 
then  we  are  going  to  be  the  determining  fac- 
tor in  the  development  of  civilization.  If  we 
are  out  of  it,  we  ourselves  are  going  to  watch 
every  other  nation  with  suspicion,  and  we  will 
be  justified,  too;  and  we  are  going  to  be 
watched  with  suspicion.  Every  movement  of 
trade,  every  relationship  of  manufacture,  ev- 
ery question  of  raw  materials,  every  matter 
that  affects  the  intercourse  of  the  world  will 
be  impeded  by  the  consciousness  that  Amer- 
ica wants  to  hold  off  and  get  something  which 
she  is  not  willing  to  share  with  the  rest  of 
mankind. 


AMERICA’S  OPPORTUNITY 
Only  those  ignorant  of  the  world  can  believe 
that  any  nation,  even  so  great  a nation  as 
the  United  States,  can  stand  alone  and  play 
a single  part  in  the  history  of  mankind.  The 

[ 1 8 1 ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

facts  of  the  world  have  changed.  We  have 
managed  in  the  process  of  civilization,  to 
make  a world  that  cannot  be  taken  to  pieces. 
The  pieces  are  dove-tailed  and  intimately- 
fitted  with  one  another,  and  unless  you  assem- 
ble them  as  you  do  the  intimate  parts  of  a 
great  machine,  civilization  will  not  work.  We 
are  tied  into  the  rest  of  the  world  by  kinship, 
by  sympathy,  by  interest  in  every  great  en- 
terprise of  human  affairs.  The  United  States 
has  become  the  economic  center  of  the  world, 
the  financial  center!  Our  advice  is  constantly 
sought.  Our  economic  engagements  run  every- 
where, into  every  part  of  the  globe.  Our  as- 
sistance is  essential  to  the  establishment  of 
normal  conditions  throughout  the  world.  You 
can  no  more  separate  yourselves  from  the  rest 
of  the  world  than  you  can  take  all  the  tender 
roots  of  a great  tree  out  of  the  earth  and  ex- 
pect the  tree  to  live.  All  the  tendrils  of  our 
life,  economic  and  social  and  every  other,  are 
interlaced  in  a way  that  is  inextricable  with 
the  similar  tendrils  of  the  rest  of  mankind. 
Shall  we  exercise  our  influence  in  the  world, 
which  can  henceforth  be  a profound  and  con- 
trolling influence,  at  a great  advantage  or  at 
an  insuperable  disadvantage  ? 

We  are  not  the  only  people  who  have  made 
up  our  mind  that  our  government  must  de- 
vote its  attention  to  peace  and  justice,  and  to 

[ 182  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

right.  The  people  all  over  the  world  have 
made  up  their  minds  to  that.  Political  liberty- 
can  exist  only  when  there  is  peace.  What  kind 
of  peace  are  we  going  to  have  and  what  kind 
of  guaranties  are  there  to  be  behind  that 
peace?  That  is  what  is  concerning  me.  I know 
the  splendid  steadiness  of  the  American  peo- 
ple, but  the  whole  world  needs  that  steadi- 
ness, and  the  American  people  are  the  make- 
weight in  the  fortunes  of  mankind.  How  long 
are  we  going  to  debate  into  which  scale  we 
will  throw  that  magnificent  equipoise  that  be- 
longs to  us  ? How  long  shall  we  be  kept  wait- 
ing for  the  answer  whether  the  world  may 
trust  us  or  despise  us  ? They  have  looked  to  us 
for  leadership.  They  have  looked  to  us  for  ex- 
ample. They  have  built  their  peace  upon  the 
basis  of  our  suggestions.  That  great  volume 
that  contains  the  Treaty  of  Peace  is  drawn 
along  the  specifications  laid  down  by  the 
American  Government,  and  now  the  world 
stands  at  amaze  because  an  authority  in 
America  hesitates  whether  it  will  endorse  an 
American  document  or  not.  The  world  is  wait- 
ing, waiting  to  see,  not  whether  we  will  take 
part  but  whether  we  will  serve  and  lead,  for  it 
has  expected  us  to  lead.  Shall  we  falter  at  the 
very  critical  moment  when  we  are  finally  to 
write  our  name  to  the  standing  pledge  which 
we  then  took? 


[ 183  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

I want  to  remind  you  that  many  other  na- 
tions were  put  under  a deeper  temptation 
than  we.  Belgium  did  not  hesitate  to  under- 
write civilization.  It  would  have  been  possible 
for  little  Belgium  at  any  time  to  make  terms 
with  the  enemy.  Belgium  was  not  prepared  to 
resist.  Belgium  knew  that  resistance  was  use- 
less. Belgium  knew  that  she  could  get  any 
term  of  advantage  from  Germany  she  pleased, 
if  she  would  only  submit,  and  at  the  cost  of 
everything  that  she  had  Belgium  did  nothing 
less  than  underwrite  civilization.  I do  not 
know  anywhere  in  history  a more  inspiring 
fact  than  that. 

Italy  could  have  had  her  terms  with  Aus- 
tria at  almost  any  period  of  the  war,  particu- 
larly just  before  she  made  her  final  stand  at 
the  Piave  River,  but  she  would  not  compound 
with  the  enemy.  She,  too,  had  underwritten 
civilization.  She  also  was  a trustee  for  civili- 
zation, and  she  would  not  sell  the  birthright  of 
mankind  for  any  sort  of  material  advantage. 

And  Serbia,  the  first  of  the  helpless  nations 
to  be  struck  down,  her  armies  driven  from  her 
own  soil,  maintained  her  armies  on  other  soil. 
The  armies  of  Serbia  were  never  dispersed. 
Whether  they  could  be  on  their  own  soil  or 
not,  they  were  fighting  for  their  rights  and 
through  their  rights  for  the  rights  of  civilized 
man. 


[ 184  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

I believe  that  America  is  going  to  be  more 
willing  than  any  other  nation  in  the  world, 
when  it  gets  its  voice  heard,  to  do  the  same 
thing  that  these  little  nations  did.  I believe 
in  my  heart  that  there  is  hardly  a man  in 
America,  if  you  get  really  back  of  his  super- 
ficial thoughts,  who  is  not  man  enough  to  be 
willing  to  make  the  sacrifice  to  underwrite 
civilization.  It  is  only  sacrifice  that  tells.  Don’t 
you  remember  what  we  used  to  cry  during  the 
Liberty  Loans,  “Lend  until  it  hurts.”  Now 
that  the  great  Treaty  of  Peace  has  established 
the  oppressed  peoples  of  the  world  who  are  af- 
fected by  this  Treaty  on  their  own  territory, 
given  them  their  own  freedom,  given  them 
command  of  their  own  affairs,  they  are  look- 
ing to  America  to  show  them  how  to  use  that 
new  liberty  and  that  new  power. 

WHY  AMERICAN  ISOLATION  IS  IMPOSSIBLE 

When  men  tell  you  that  we  are,  by  going 
into  the  League  of  Nations,  reversing  the 
policy  of  the  United  States,  they  have  not 
thought  the  thing  out.  The  statement  is  not 
true.  It  is  impossible  for  the  United  States  to 
be  isolated.  The  isolation  of  the  United  States 
is  at  an  end,  not  because  we  chose  to  go  into 
the  politics  of  the  world  but  because  by  the 
sheer  genius  of  this  people  and  the  growth  of 
our  power  we  have  become  a determining  fac- 

[ 185] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

/ 'for  in  the  history  of  mankind,  and  after  you 
j have  become  a determining  factor  you  cannot 
1 remain  isolated,  whether  you  want  to  or  not. 

Irica  is  going  to  grow  more  and  more  pow- 
and  the  more  powerful  she  is  the  more  in- 
ible  it  is  that  she  should  be  the  trustee  for 
)eace  of  the  world.  I am  not  stating  it  as 
tter  of  power.  I am  not  stating  it  with  the 
ght  that  the  United  States  has  greater 
irial  wealth  and  greater  physical  power 
any  other  nation.  The  point  that  I want 
to  get  is  a very  profound  point;  the  point 
at  the  United  States  is  the  only  nation  in 
vorld  that  has  sufficient  moral  force  with 
•est  of  the  world.  While  old  rivalries  and 
jealousies  and  many  of  the  intricate 
ids  of  history  woven  in  unhappy  patterns 
made  the  rest  of  the  world  suspect  one 
artother  nobody  doubts  America.  It  is  the 
ofily  nation  that  has  proved  its  disinterested- 
ness. It  is  the  only  nation  which  is  not  sus- 
pected by  the  other  nations  of  the  world  of 
ulterior  purposes.  There  is  not  a Province  in 
Europe  in  which  American  troops  would  not 
at  this  moment  be  welcomed  with  open  arms, 
because  the  population  would  know  that  they 
had  come  as  friends  and  would  go  as  soon  as 
their  errand  was  fulfilled.  That  is  the  reputa- 
tion of  American  soldiers  throughout  Europe, 
and  it  is  their  reputation  because  it  is  true. 

[ 186  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

That  is  the  temper  in  which  they  go;  that  is 
the  principle  upon  which  they  act  and  upon 
which  the  government  back  of  them  acts,  and 
the  great  people  whom  that  government  rep- 
resents. What  an  extraordinary  tribute  to  the 
principles  of  the  United  States!  What  an  ex- 
traordinary tribute  to  the  sincerity  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  United  States ! America  is  the  only 
nation  whose  guarantee  will  suffice  to  substi- 
tute discussion  for  war.  And  all  the  world, 
provided  we  do  not  betray  them  by  rejecting 
this  Treaty, will  continue  to  regard  us  as  their 
friends  and  follow  us  as  their  friends  and  serve 
us  as  their  friends.  It  is  the  noblest  opportu- 
nity ever  offered  to  a great  people. 

You  have  been  told  that  Washington  ad- 
vised us  against  entangling  alliances,  and  gen- 
tlemen have  used  that  as  an  argument  against 
the  League  of  Nations.  What  Washington  had 
in  mind  was  exactly  what  these  gentlemen 
want  to  lead  us  back  to.  The  day  we  have  left 
behind  us  was  a day  of  alliances.  It  was  a day 
of  balances  of  power.  It  was  a day  of  “every 
nation  take  care  of  itself  or  make  a partner- 
ship with  some  other  nation  or  group  of  na- 
tions to  hold  the  peace  of  the  world  steady  or 
to  dominate  the  weaker  portions  of  the  world.  ’ ’ 
Those  were  the  days  of  alliances.  This  project 
of  the  League  of  Nations  is  a great  process  of 
disentanglement.  The  people  of  the  world  are 

[ 187  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

tired  of  every  other  kind  of  experiment  except 
the  one  we  are  going  to  try.  I have  called  it  an 
experiment;  I frankly  admit  that  it  is  an  ex- 
periment, but  it  is  a very  promising  experi- 
ment, because  there  is  not  a statesman  in  the 
world  who  does  not  know  that  his  people  de- 
mand it.  The  world  has  turned  a corner  that 
it  will  never  turn  again.  The  old  order  is  gone 
and  nobody  can  build  it  up  again. 

OPPONENTS  HAVE  NO  PLAN 

I want  you  to  realize  those  Americans  who 
are  opposing  this  plan  of  a League  of  Nations 
offer  no  substitute.  There  is  a great  construc- 
tive plan  presented,  and  no  man  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  present  critical  situation  of  man- 
kind has  the  right  to  oppose  any  constructive 
plan  except  by  a better  constructive  plan.  If 
anybody  dares  to  defeat  this  great  experi- 
ment, then  he  must  gather  together  the 
counsellors  of  the  world  and  do  something 
better.  If  there  is  a better  scheme,  I for  one 
will  subscribe  to  it.  A great  plan  is  the  only 
thing  that  can  defeat  a great  plan.  They  offer 
nothing  that  they  pretend  will  accomplish  the 
same  object.  The  only  thing  that  wins  against 
a program  is  a better  program.  They  are  ready 
to  go  back  to  that  old  and  ugly  plan  of  armed 
nations,  of  alliances,  of  watchful  jealousies,  of 
rabid  antagonisms,  of  purposes  concealed, 

[ 1 88  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

running  by  the  subtle  channels  of  intrigue 
through  the  veins  of  people  who  do  not  dream 
what  poison  is  being  injected  into  their 
systems. 

Now  are  we  going  to  bring  about  a peace 
for  which  everything  waits?  We  cannot  bring 
it  about  by  doing  nothing!  America  cannot 
bring  about  peace  by  herself.  No  other  nation 
can  bring  about  peace  by  itself.  The  agree- 
ment of  a small  group  of  nations  cannot  bring 
about  peace.  The  peace  of  the  world  cannot 
be  established  without  America.  America  is 
necessary  to  the  peace  of  the  world.  And  re- 
verse the  proposition:  The  peace  and  good- 
will of  the  world  are  necessary  to  America.  I 
have  been  very  much  amazed  and  very  much 
amused,  if  I could  be  amused  in  such  critical 
circumstances,  to  see  that  the  statesmanship 
of  some  gentlemen  consists  in  the  very  inter- 
esting proposition  that  we  do  nothing  at  all.  I 
had  heard  of  standing  pat  before,  but  I never 
had  heard  before  of  standpatism  going  to  the 
length  of  saying  it  is  none  of  our  business  and 
we  do  not  care  what  happens  to  the  rest  of  the 
world.  Negation  will  not  serve  the  world. 
Generalities  will  not  penetrate  to  the  heart  of 
this  great  question.  Let  me  pay  the  tribute 
which  it  is  only  just  that  I should  pay  to  some 
of  the  men  who  have  been,  I believe,  misun- 
derstood in  this  business.  It  is  only  a handful 

[ 189  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

of  men  who  are  trying  to  defeat  the  Treaty  or 
to  prevent  the  League.  The  great  majority,  in 
official  bodies  and  out,  are  scrutinizing  it,  as 
it  is  perfectly  legitimate  that  they  should 
scrutinize  it,  to  see  if  it  is  necessary  that  they 
should  qualify  it  in  any  respect,  and  my 
knowledge  of  their  conscience,  my  knowledge 
of  their  public  principle,  makes  me  certain 
that  they  will  sooner  or  later  see  that  it  is  saf- 
est since  it  is  all  expressed  in  the  plainest 
English  that  the  English  dictionary  affords, 
not  to  qualify  it — to  accept  it  as  it  is.  They 
cannot  in  conscience  or  good  faith  deprive  us 
of  this  great  work  of  peace  without  substitut- 
ing some  other  that  is  better.  Qualified  adop- 
tion is  not  adoption.  Qualification  means  ask- 
ing special  exemptions  and  privileges  for  the 
United  States.  We  cannot  ask  that.  Nega- 
tions are  not  going  to  construct  the  policies  of 
mankind.  The  world  cannot  breathe  in  an  at- 
mosphere of  negations.  The  world  cannot  deal 
with  nations  who  say,  “We  wont  play.”  The 
world  cannot  have  anything  to  do  with  an  ar- 
rangement in  which  every  nation  says,  “We 
will  take  care  of  ourselves.”  Opposition  is 
not  going  to  save  the  world.  Opposition  con- 
structs nothing.  Opposition  is  the  specialty  of 
those  who  are  Bolshevistically  inclined — and 
again  I assure  you  I am  not  comparing  any  of 
my  respected  colleagues  to  Bolshevists;  I am 

[ 19°  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

merely  pointing  out  that  the  Bolshevist  spirit 
lacks  every  element  of  constructiveness.  They 
have  destroyed  everything  and  they  propose 
nothing,  and  while  there  is  a common  abhor- 
rence for  political  Bolshevism,  I hope  there  will 
not  be  such  a thing  growing  up  in  our  country 
as  international  Bolshevism,  the  Bolshevism 
which  destroys  the  constructive  work  of  men 
who  have  conscientiously  tried  to  cement  the 
good  feeling  of  the  great  peoples  of  the  world. 

I have  feared  at  times  that  there  were  those 
amongst  us  who  did  not  realize  just  what  the 
heart  of  this  question  is.  I have  been  afraid 
that  their  thoughts  were  lingering  in  a past 
day  when  the  calculation  was  always  of  na- 
tional advantage,  and  that  it  had  not  come  to 
see  the  light  of  the  new  day  in  which  men  are 
thinking  of  the  common  advantage  and  safe- 
ty of  mankind.  The  issue  is  nothing  else. 
Either  we  must  stand  apart,  and  in  the  phrase 
of  some  gentlemen,  “take  care  of  ourselves,” 
which  means  antagonize  others,  or  we  must 
join  hands  with  the  other  great  nations  of  the 
world  and  with  the  weak  nations  of  the  world, 
in  seeking  that  justice  is  everywhere  main- 
tained. You  know  you  cannot  establish  civil 
society  if  anybody  is  going  to  be  a neutral 
with  regard  to  the  maintenance  of  the  law. 
W e are  all  bound  in  conscience,  and  all  public 
officers  are  bound  in  oath,  not  to  remain  neu- 

[ T9X  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

tral  with  regard  to  the  maintenance  of  the 
law  and  the  vindication  of  the  right,  and  one 
of  the  things  that  occurred  in  this  conference, 
was  this:  One  of  the  principles  that  I went  to 
Paris  most  insisting  on  was  the  freedom  of  the 
seas.  Now,  the  freedom  of  the  seas  means  the 
definition  of  the  right  of  neutrals  to  use  the 
seas  when  other  nations  are  at  war,  but  under 
the  League  of  Nations  there  are  no  neutrals, 
and,  therefore,  what  I have  called  the  practi- 
cal joke  on  myself  was  that  by  the  very  thing 
that  I was  advocating  it  became  unnecessary 
to  define  the  freedom  of  the  seas.  All  nations 
are  engaged  to  maintain  the  right,  and  in  that 
sense  no  nation  can  be  neutral  when  the  right 
is  invaded,  and,  all  being  comrades  and  part- 
ners in  a common  cause,  we  all  have  an  equal 
right  to  use  the  seas.  To  my  mind  it  is  a much 
better  solution  than  had  occurred  to  me,  or 
than  had  occurred  to  anyone  else  with  regard 
to  that  single  definition  of  right.  We  must  go 
forward  with  this  concert  of  nations  or  we 
must  go  back  to  the  old  arrangement,  because 
the  guaranties  of  peace  will  not  be  sufficient 
without  the  United  States,  and  those  who  op- 
pose this  Covenant  are  driven  to  the  necessity 
of  advocating  the  old  order  of  balances  of 
power.  If  you  do  not  have  this  universal  con- 
cert, you  have  what  we  have  always  avoided, 
necessary  alignment  of  this  or  that  nation 

[ 192  J 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

with  one  other  nation  or  with  some  other 
group  of  nations. 

OPPOSITION  HELPS  GERMANY 

What  is  disturbing  me  most  about  the  pres- 
ent debate — not  because  I doubt  its  issue,  but 
because  I regret  its  length — is  that  it  is  heart- 
ening the  representatives  of  Germany  to  be- 
lieve that  at  last  they  are  going  to  do  in  this 
way  what  they  were  not  able  to  do  by  arms, 
separate  us  in  interest  and  purpose  from  our 
associates  in  the  war.  The  League  of  Nations 
is  very  near  the  heart  of  the  people.  There  are 
some  men  in  public  life  who  do  not  seem  to  be 
in  touch  with  the  heart  of  the  people,  but 
those  who  are  know  how  that  heart  throbs 
deep  and  strong  for  this  great  enterprise  of 
humanity,  for  it  is  nothing  less  than  that.  We 
must  set  our  purposes  in  a very  definite  way 
to  assist  the  judgment  of  public  men.  I do  not 
mean  in  any  way  to  coerce  the  judgment  of 
public  men,  but  to  enlighten  and  assist  that 
judgment,  for  I am  convinced,  after  crossing 
the  continent,  that  there  is  no  sort  of  doubt 
that  80  per  cent  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States  are  for  the  League  of  Nations,  and  that 
the  chief  opposition  outside  legislative  halls 
comes  from  the  very  disquieting  element  that 
we  had  to  deal  with  before  and  during  the 
war.  All  the  elements  that  tended  toward  dis- 

[ 193  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

loyalty  are  against  the  League  and  for  a very 
good  reason.  If  this  is  not  adopted  we  will 
serve  Germany’s  purpose,  because  we  will  be 
dissociated  from  the  nations,  and  I am  afraid 
permanently  dissociated  from  the  nations  with 
whom  we  cooperated  in  defeating  Germany. 

I am  not  suggesting,  I have  no  right  to  sug- 
gest, that  the  men  who  are  opposing  this  Cove- 
nant have  any  thought  of  assisting  Germany 
in  their  minds,  but  my  point  is  that  by  doing 
what  they  are  doing  they  are  assisting  Ger- 
many, whether  they  want  to  do  so  or  not.  I 
would  not  have  you  understand  me  to  mean 
that  the  men  who  are  opposing  the  ratifica- 
tion of  the  Treaty  are  consciously  encouraging 
the  pro-German  propaganda.  I have  no  right 
to  say  that  or  to  think  it,  but  I do  say  that 
what  they  are  doing  is  encouraging  the  pro- 
German  propaganda,  and  that  it  is  bringing 
about  a hope  in  the  minds  of  those  whom  we 
have  just  spent  our  precious  blood  to  defeat 
that  they  may  separate  us  from  the  rest  of  the 
world  and  produce  this  interesting  spectacle, 
only  two  nations  standing  aside  from  this 
great  concert  and  guaranty  of  peace — beaten 
Germany  and  triumphant  America.  No  part 
of  the  world  has  been  so  pleased  by  our  pres- 
ent hesitation  as  the  leaders  of  Germany,  be- 
cause their  hope  from  the  first  has  been  that 
sooner  or  later  we  would  fall  out  with  our  as- 

[ 194  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

sociates.  Their  hope  was  to  divide  us  before 
the  fighting  stopped,  and  now  their  hope  is  to 
divide  us  after  the  fighting. 

America  is  necessary  to  the  peace  of  the 
world.  Germany  realizes  it;  and  Germany 
wants  us  to  stay  out  of  this  Treaty.  Not  under 
any  deception.  Not  under  the  deception  that 
we  will  turn  in  sympathy  toward  her.  Not 
under  the  delusion  that  we  would  seek  in  any 
direct  or  conscious  way  to  serve  Germany, 
but  with  the  knowledge  that  the  guaranties 
will  not  be  sufficient  without  America,  and 
that,  inasmuch  as  Germany  is  out  of  the  ar- 
rangement, it  will  be  very  useful  to  Germany 
to  have  America  out  of  the  arrangement.  The 
things  prescribed  in  this  Treaty  will  not  be 
fully  carried  out  if  anyone  of  the  great  influ- 
ences that  brought  that  result  about  is  with- 
held from  its  consummation.  Germany  knows 
that  if  America  is  out  of  the  arrangement 
America  will  lose  the  confidence  and  coopera- 
tion of  all  the  other  nations  in  the  world,  and, 
fearing  America’s  strength,  she  wants  to  see 
America  alienated  from  the  peoples  from 
whom  she  has  been  alienated.  It  is  a perfectly 
reasonable  program.  She  wants  to  see  Amer- 
ica isolated.  She  desires  nothing  so  much  as 
that  we  should  be  isolated,  because  she  knows 
that  then  the  same  kind  of  suspicion,  the 
same  kind  of  hostility,  the  same  kind  of  un- 

[ J95  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

friendliness — that  subtle  poison  that  brings 
every  trouble  that  comes  between  nations — 
will  center  on  the  United  States  as  well  as 
upon  Germany.  She  is  isolated.  Her  isolation 
will  be  broken;  she  will  have  a comrade, 
whether  that  nation  wants  to  be  her  comrade 
or  not,  and  what  the  lads  did  on  the  fields  of 
France  will  be  undone.  She  wants  to  see  one 
great  nation  left  out  of  the  combination  which 
she  never  would  dare  face  again.  I want  those 
who  have  any  kind  of  sympathy  for  the  pur- 
poses with  which  we  went  into  the  war  now  to 
reflect  upon  this  proposition:  Are  we  going  to 
prove  the  enemy  of  the  rest  of  the  world  just 
when  we  have  proved  its  savior?  It  would 
touch  the  honor  of  the  United  States  very 
near  if  at  the  end  of  this  great  struggle  we 
should  seek  to  take  the  position  which  our 
enemies  desire  and  our  friends  deplore. 

INSURANCE  AGAINST  WAR 

Men  have  asked  me,  “Do  you  think  that  the 
League  of  Nations  is  an  absolute  guarantee 
against  war?”  Of  course  it  is  not.  Nobody 
in  his  senses  claims  for  the  Covenant  of  the 
League  of  Nations  that  it  is  certain  to  stop 
war.  Senator  Lodge  says  if  we  can  stop  some 
wars  it  is  worth  while.  No  human  arrange- 
ment can  give  you  an  absolute  guarantee 
against  human  passion,  but  I answer  that 

[ 196] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

question  with  another,  If  it  only  creates  a pre- 
sumption that  there  will  not  be  war,  would 
you  not  rather  have  that  presumption  than 
live  under  the  certainty  that  there  will  be 
war?  Though  the  chance  should  be  poor,  is  it 
not  worth  taking  a chance?  Let  men  discount 
the  proposed  arrangements  as  much  as  they 
will;  let  us  regard  it  as  an  insurance  policy.  If 
you  thought  you  had  fifty  per  cent  insurance 
against  v/ar,  would  you  not  jump  at  it  ? If  you 
thought  you  had  thirty  per  cent  insurance 
against  war,  would  you  not  take  it?  If  you 
thought  you  had  ten  per  cent  insurance,  would 
you  not  think  it  better  than  nothing?  If  you 
can  get  a little  insurance  against  an  infinite 
catastrophe,  is  it  not  better  than  getting  none 
at  all?  If  the  nations  of  the  world  will  indeed 
and  in  truth  accept  this  great  Covenant  of  a 
League  of  Nations  and  agree  to  put  arbitra- 
tion and  discussion  always  first  and  war  al- 
ways last,  I say  that  we  have  an  immense  in- 
surance against  war,  and  that  is  exactly  what 
this  great  Covenant  does.  I take  it  you  want 
some  insurance  against  war  rather  than  none, 
and  the  experience  of  the  world  demonstrates 
that  this  is  an  almost  complete  insurance.  The 
one  thing  that  a wrong  cause  cannot  stand  is 
exposure.  The  best  way  to  dissipate  nonsense 
is  to  expose  it  to  the  open  air.  The  particular 
thing  in  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Na- 

[ 197  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 
.*» 

tions  is  that  every  cause  shall  be  deliberately 
exposed  to  the  judgment  of  mankind.  It  sub- 
stitutes what  the  whole  world  has  long  been 
for,  namely,  arbitration  and  discussion  for 
war.  In  other  words,  all  the  great  fighting  na- 
tions of  the  world — for  Germany  for  the  time 
being,  at  any  rate,  is  not  a great  fighting  na- 
tion— promise  to  lay  their  case,  whatever  it 
may  be,  before  the  whole  jury  of  humanity. 
They  put  it  either  before  a jury  by  whom  they 
are  bound  or  before  a jury  which  will  publish 
all  the  facts  to  mankind  and  express  a frank 
opinion  regarding  it.  You  have  here  what  the 
world  must  have,  what  America  went  into 
this  war  to  obtain.  You  have  here  an  estoppel 
of  the  brutal  sudden  impulse  of  war.  You  have 
here  a restraint  upon  the  passions  of  ambi- 
tious nations.  If  there  had  Seen  any  arrange- 
ment comparable  with  this  in  1914,  the  ca- 
lamitous war  which  we  have  just  passed 
through  would  have  been  inconceivable.  There 
is  no  other  way  to  do  it  than  by  a universal 
league  of  nations,  and  what  is  proposed  is  a 
universal  league  of  nations. 

The  majestic  thing  about  the  League  of  Na- 
tions is  that  it  is  to  include  the  great  peoples 
of  the  world,  all  except  Germany.  Germany  is 
one  of  the  great  peoples  of  the  world.  I would 
be  ashamed  not  to  say  that.  Those  60,000,000 
industrious  and  inventive  and  accomplished 

[ 198  1 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

people  are  one  of  the  great  peoples  of  the 
world.  They  have  been  put  upon.  They  have 
been  misled.  Their  minds  have  been  debased 
by  a false  philosophy.  They  have  been  taught 
things  that  the  human  spirit  ought  to  reject, 
but  they  will  come  out  of  that  nightmare, 
they  will  come  out  of  that  phantasm,  and  they 
will  again  be  a great  people.  And  when  they 
are  out  of  it,  when  they  have  got  over  that 
dream  of  conquest  and  of  oppression,  when 
they  have  shown  that  their  government  really 
is  based  upon  new  principles  and  upon  demo- 
cratic principles,  then  we,  all  of  us  at  Paris 
agree  that  they  should  be  admitted  to  the 
League  of  Nations. 

In  order  to  meet  the  present  situation,  we 
have  got  to  know  what  we  are  dealing  with. 
Look  at  this  thing  in  a new  aspect,  look  upon 
it  not  with  calculations  of  interest,  not  with 
fear  of  responsibility,  but  with  a conscious- 
ness of  the  great  moral  issue  which  the  United 
States  must  now  decide.  We  are  not  dealing 
with  the  kind  of  document  which  this  is  rep- 
resented by  some  gentlemen  to  be,  and  inas- 
much as  we  are  dealing  with  a document  simon 
pure  in  respect  of  the  very  principles  we  have 
professed  to  live  up  to,  we  have  got  to  do  one 
or  other  of  two  things,  we  have  either  got  to 
adopt  it  or  reject  it.  I say  without  qualifica- 
tion that  every  nation  that  is  not  afraid  of 

[ 199  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

the  judgment  of  mankind  will  go  into  this  ar- 
rangement. There  is  nothing  for  any  nation  to 
lose  whose  purposes  are  right  and  whose  cause 
is  just.  The  only  nations  that  need  fear  to  go 
into  it  are  those  that  have  designs  that  are  in- 
consistent with  justice  and  are  the  opposite  of 
peace.  The  issue  is  final.  We  cannot  avoid  it. 
We  either  go  in  with  the  other  free  peoples  of 
the  world  to  guarantee  the  peace  of  the  world 
now,  or  we  stay  out  and  on  some  dark  and  dis- 
astrous day  we  seek  admission  to  the  League 
of  Nations  along  with  Germany.  If  we  keep 
out  of  this  League  now,  we  can  never  enter  it 
except  alongside  of  Germany.  We  either  go  in 
now  or  come  in  later  with  our  recent  enemies. 
Every  great  fighting  nation  in  the  world  is  on 
the  list  of  those  who  are  to  constitute  the 
League  of  Nations.  I say  every  great  nation, 
because  America  is  going  to  be  included 
among  them,  and  the  only  choice  is  whether 
we  will  go  in  now  or  come  in  later  with  Ger- 
many; whether  we  will  go  in  as  founders  of 
this  covenant  of  freedom  or  go  in  as  those 
who  are  admitted  after  they  have  made  a mis- 
take and  repented.  If  you  are  going  to  put 
into  the  world  American  enterprise  and  Amer- 
ican faith  and  American  vision,  then  you 
must  be  the  principal  partners  in  the  new  part- 
nership which  the  world  is  forming.  I take  it 
you  are  too  proud  to  ask  to  be  exempted  from 

[ 200  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

responsibilities  which  the  other  members  of 
the  League  will  carry.  We  go  in  upon  equal 
terms  or  we  do  not  go  in  at  all;  and  if  we  do 
not  go  in,  think  of  the  tragedy  of  that  result, 
the  only  sufficient  guaranty  of  the  peace  of 
the  world  withheld ! 

ANOTHER  WORLD  WAR 

Stop  for  a moment  to  think  about  the  next 
war!  For,  I can  predict  with  absolute  certain- 
ty that  within  another  generation  there  will 
be  another  world  war  if  the  nations  of  the 
world  do  not  concert  the  method  by  which  to 
prevent  it.  What  shall  I call  it ? The  final  war? 
It  might  be  the  final  arrest,  though  I pray  only 
the  temporary  arrest,  of  civilization  itself;  and 
America  has,  if  I may  take  the  liberty  of  say- 
ing so,  a greater  interest  in  the  prevention  of 
that  war  than  any  other  nation.  America  is 
less  exhausted  by  the  recent  war  than  the 
other  belligerents;  she  is  not  exhausted  at  all. 
America  has  paid  for  the  war  that  has  gone  by 
less  heavily,  in  proportion  to  her  wealth,  than 
the  other  nations.  America  still  has  free  capi- 
tal enough  for  its  own  industries  and  for  the 
industries  of  the  other  countries  that  have  to 
build  their  industries  anew.  The  next  war 
would  have  to  be  paid  for  in  American  blood 
and  American  money.  The  nation  of  all  na- 
tions that  is  most  interested  to  prevent  the  re- 

[ 201  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

currence  of  what  has  already  happened  is  the 
nation  which  would  assuredly  have  to  bear 
the  brunt  of  that  great  catastrophe.  It  is  not 
likely,  that  with  the  depleted  resources  of  the 
great  fighting  nations  of  Europe,  there  will  be 
another  war  soon,  but  unless  we  concert  meas- 
ures to  prevent  it,  there  will  be  another  and 
a final  war,  just  about  the  time  these  children 
come  to  maturity;  and  it  is  our  duty  to  look  in 
the  face  the  real  circumstances  of  the  world  in 
order  that  we  may  not  be  unfaithful  to  the 
great  duty  which  America  undertook  in  the 
hour  and  day  of  her  birth.  The  next  time  will 
come;  it  will  come  while  this  generation  is  liv- 
ing, and  the  children  will  be  sacrificed  upon 
the  altar  of  that  war.  It  will  be  the  last  war. 
Humanity  will  never  suffer  another,  if  hu- 
manity survives. 

I do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  the  war  we 
have  just  been  through,  though  it  was  shot 
through  with  terror  of  every  kind,  is  not  to  be 
compared  with  the  war  we  would  have  to  face 
next  time.  There  were  destructive  gases,  there 
were  methods  of  explosive  destruction  un- 
heard of  even  during  this  war,  which  were  just 
ready  for  use  when  the  war  ended — great  pro- 
jectiles that  guided  themselves  and  shot  into 
the  heavens  went  for  a hundred  miles  and 
more  and  then  burst  tons  of  explosives  upon 
helpless  cities,  something  to  which  the  guns 

[ 202  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

with  which  the  Germans  bombarded  Paris 
from  a distance  were  not  comparable.  What 
the  Germans  used  were  toys  as  compared  with 
what  would  be  used  in  the  next  war.  Ask  any 
soldier  if  he  wants  to  go  through  a hell  like 
that  again.  The  soldiers  know  what  the  next 
war  would  be.  They  know  what  the  inven- 
tions were  that  were  just  about  to  be  used  for 
the  absolute  destruction  of  mankind.  I am  for 
any  kind  of  insurance  against  a barbaric  re- 
versal of  civilization. 

AMERICA  AND  MANKIND 

Look  at  the  thing  in  its  large  aspect,  in  its 
majesty.  Particularly,  look  at  it  as  a fulfil- 
ment of  the  destiny  of  the  United  States,  for 
it  is  nothing  less.  At  last,  after  this  long  cen- 
tury and  more  of  blood  and  terror,  the  world 
has  come  to  the  vision  that  that  little  body  of 
3,000,000  people,  strung  along  the  Atlantic 
coast  of  this  continent  had  in  that  far  year 
1776.  Men  in  Europe  laughed  at  them,  at  this 
little  handful  of  dreamers,  this  little  body  of 
men  who  talked  dogmatically  about  liberty, 
and  since  then  that  fire  which  they  started  on 
that  little  coast  has  consumed  every  auto- 
cratic government  in  the  world,  every  civil- 
ized autocratic  government,  and  now  at  last 
the  flame  has  leaped  to  Berlin,  and  there  is 
the  funeral  pyre  of  the  German  Empire. 

[ 203  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 


America  is  great  because  of  the  ideas  she 
has  conceived.  America  is  great  because  of  the 
purposes  she  has  set  herself  to  achieve.  Amer- 
ica is  not  going  to  be  immortal  because  she 
has  immense  wealth.  Other  nations  had  im- 
mense wealth  and  went  down  in  decay  and 
disgrace,  because  they  had  nothing  else.  Amer- 
ica is  great  because  she  has  seen  visions  that 
other  nations  have  not  seen  and  the  one  enter- 
prise that  does  engage  the  steadfast  loyalty 
and  support  of  the  United  States  is  an  enter- 
prise for  the  liberty  of  mankind.  Let  gentle- 
men beware,  therefore,  how  they  disappoint 
the  world.  Let  gentlemen  beware,  therefore, 
how  they  betray  the  immemorial  principles  of 
the  United  States.  Let  men  not  make  the  mis- 
take of  claiming  a position  of  privilege  for  the 
United  States  which  gives  it  all  the  advan- 
tages of  the  League  of  Nations  and  none  of 
the  risks  and  responsibilities.  The  principle  of 
equity  everywhere  is  that  along  with  a right 
goes  a duty;  that  if  you  claim  a right  for  your- 
self you  must  be  ready  to  support  that  right 
for  somebody  else;  that  if  you  claim  to  be  a 
member  in  a society  of  any  sort  you  must  not 
claim  the  right  to  dodge  the  responsibilities 
and  avoid  the  burden,  but  you  must  carry  the 
weight  of  the  enterprise  along  with  the  hope 
of  the  enterprise.  That  is  the  spirit  of  free  men 


[ 204  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

everywhere,  and  that  I know  to  be  the  spirit 
of  the  United  States. 

I will  not  join  in  claiming  under  the  name 
of  justice  an  unjust  position  of  privilege  for 
the  country  I love  and  honor.  Neither  am  I 
afraid  of  responsibility.  Neither  will  I scuttle. 
Neither  will  I be  a little  American.  America, 
in  her  make  up,  in  her  purposes,  in  her  prin- 
ciples, is  the  biggest  thing  in  the  world,  and 
she  must  measure  up  to  the  measure  of  the 
world!  I will  be  no  party  in  belittling  her.  I 
will  be  no  party  in  saying  that  America  is 
afraid  of  responsibilities  which  I know  she  can 
carry  and  in  which  in  carrying  I am  sure  she 
will  lead  the  world.  Why,  if  we  were  to  decline 
to  go  into  this  humane  arrangement  we  would 
be  declining  the  invitation  which  all  the  world 
extends  to  us  to  lead  them  in  the  enterprise  of 
liberty  and  justice.  I,  for  one,  will  not  decline 
that  invitation.  My  first  thought  is  how  I can 
help,  how  I can  be  effective  in  the  game,  how 
I can  make  the  influence  of  America  tell  for 
the  guidance  and  salvation  of  the  world,  not 
how  I can  keep  out  of  trouble.  I want  to  get 
into  any  kind  of  trouble  that  will  help  liber- 
ate mankind! 

I,  for  one,  believe  more  profoundly  than  in 
anything  else  human  in  the  destiny  of  the 
United  States!  I believe  that  she  has  a spirit- 
ual energy  in  her  which  no  other  nation  can 

[ 205  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

contribute  to  the  liberation  of  mankind,  and 
I know  that  the  heart  of  America  is  stronger 
than  her  business  calculations.  That  is  what 
the  world  found  out  when  we  went  into  the 
war.  When  we  went  into  the  war,  there  was 
not  a nation  in  the  world  that  did  not  believe 
we  were  more  interested  in  making  money  out 
of  it  than  in  serving  the  cause  of  liberty.  And 
when  we  went  in,  in  those  few  months  the 
whole  world  stood  at  amaze  and  ended  with 
an  enthusiastic  conversion.  They  now  believe 
that  America  will  stand  by  anybody  that  is 
fighting  for  justice  and  for  right,  and  we  shall 
not  disappoint  them. 

I look  forward  with  quickened  pulse  to  the 
days  that  lie  ahead  of  us  as  a member  of  the 
League  of  Nations,  for  we  shall  be  a member 
of  the  League  of  Nations!  I believe  in  Divine 
Providence.  If  I did  not,  I would  go  crazy.  If 
I thought  the  direction  of  the  disordered  af- 
fairs of  this  world  depended  upon  our  finite 
intelligence,  I should  not  know  how  to  reason 
my  way  to  sanity,  and  I do  not  believe  that 
there  is  any  body  of  men,  however  they  con- 
cert their  power  or  their  influence,  that  can 
defeat  this  great  enterprise  which  is  the  enter- 
prise of  Divine  mercy  and  peace  and  goodwill. 

I look  forward  with  confidence  and  with  ex- 
alted hope  to  the  time  when  we  can  indeed 
legitimately  and  constantly  be  the  champions 

[ 206  ] 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

and  friends  of  those  who  are  struggling  for 
right  anywhere  in  the  world.  We  were  re- 
spected in  those  old  Revolutionary  days  when 
there  were  three  millions  of  us.  We  are,  it  hap- 
pens, very  much  more  respected  now  that 
there  are  more  than  a hundred  millions  of  us. 
Now  that  we  command  some  of  the  most  im- 
portant resources  of  the  world,  back  of  the 
majesty  of  the  United  States  lies  the  strength 
of  the  United  States.  No  nation  is  likely  to 
forget  that  behind  the  moral  judgment  of  the 
United  States  resides  the  overwhelming  force 
of  the  United  States!  So,  I look  forward  with 
profound  gratification  to  the  time  when  the 
American  people  can  say  to  their  fellows  in  all 
parts  of  the  world,  “We  are  the  friends  of  lib- 
erty; we  have  joined  with  the  rest  of  mankind 
in  securing  the  guarantees  of  liberty;  we  stand 
here  with  you  the  eternal  champions  of  what 
is  right,  and  may  God  keep  us  in  the  Cove- 
nant that  we  have  formed.”  God  send  that 
day  may  come,  and  come  soon  so  that  men 
shall  always  say  that  American  soldiers  saved 
Europe  and  American  citizens  saved  the 
world ! 

I beg  that  these  things  may  sink  in  your 
thoughts,  because  we  are  at  a turning  point  in 
the  fortunes  of  the  world.  I beg  that  you  will 
carry  this  question  with  you,  not  in  little 
pieces,  not  with  this,  that  and  the  other  detail 


AMERICA  AND  WORLD  PROBLEMS 

at  the  front  of  your  mind,  but  as  a great  pic- 
ture including  the  whole  of  the  Nation  and  the 
whole  of  Humanity,  and  know  that  now  is  the 
golden  hour  when  America  can  at  last  prove 
that  all  she  has  promised  in  the  day  of  her 
birth  was  no  dream  but  a thing  which  she  saw 
in  its  concrete  reality,  the  rights  of  men,  the 
prosperity  of  nations,  the  majesty  of  justice, 
and  the  sacredness  of  peace. 

It  is  with  this  solemn  thought,  that  we  are 
at  a turning  point  in  the  destinies  of  mankind, 
and  that  America  is  the  makeweight  of  man- 
kind, that  I,  with  perfect  confidence,  leave 
this  great  question  to  your  unbiased  judg- 
ment. 


[ 208  ] 


APPENDICES 


> 


■SN 


V. 


$ 


t 


5; 


I 

X 


A 


President  Wilson  s Address  to  the  Representa- 
tives of  all  the  Allied  and  Associated  Na- 
tions at  the  Paris  Peace  Conference , Janu- 
ary i$th,  1919,  making  it  clear  beyond  all 
question , the  United  States  had  entered  the 
World  War  with  no  thought  or  purpose  of 
intervening  in  the  politics  of  Europe  or  of 
any  part  of  the  world , and  why  a League  of 
Nations  was  essential  for  the  maintenance 
of  world  peace , the  matter  in  which  the 
United  States  was  most  concerned.  Follow- 
ing this  Address , the  Paris  Peace  Confer- 
ence unanimously  agreed  that  the  League 
of  Nations  should  be  an  integral  part  of  the 
Preaty  of  Versailles. 

“I  consider  it  a distinguished  privilege  to  be 
permitted  to  open  the  discussion  in  this  con- 
ference on  the  League  of  Nations.  We  have 
assembled  for  two  purposes : to  make  the  pres- 
ent settlements  which  have  been  rendered 
necessary  by  this  war,  and  also  to  secure  the 
peace  of  the  world,  not  only  by  the  present 
settlements  but  by  the  arrangements  we  shall 
make  at  this  conference  for  its  maintenance. 

[ 211  ] 


APPENDIX  A 

The  League  of  Nations  seems  to  me  to  be  nec- 
essary for  both  of  these  purposes.  There  are 
many  complicated  questions  connected  with 
the  present  settlements  which  perhaps  cannot 
be  successfully  worked  out  to  an  ultimate  is- 
sue by  the  decisions  we  shall  arrive  at  here.  I 
can  easily  conceive  that  many  of  these  settle- 
ments will  need  subsequent  consideration, 
that  many  of  the  decisions  we  make  shall  need 
subsequent  alteration  in  some  degree;  for,  if 
I may  judge  by  my  own  study  of  some  of  these 
questions,  they  are  not  susceptible  of  confi- 
dent judgments  at  present. 

“It  is,  therefore,  necessary  that  we  should 
set  up  some  machinery,  by  which  the  work  of 
this  conference  should  be  rendered  complete. 
We  have  assembled  here  for  the  purpose  of 
doing  very  much  more  than  making  the  pres- 
ent settlements  that  are  necessary.  We  are  as- 
sembled under  very  peculiar  conditions  of 
world  opinion.  I may  say  without  straining 
the  point  that  we  are  not  representatives  of 
governments,  but  representatives  of  peoples. 
It  will  not  suffice  to  satisfy  governmental  cir- 
cles anywhere.  It  is  necessary  that  we  should 
satisfy  the  opinion  of  mankind.  The  burdens 
of  this  war  have  fallen  in  an  unusual  degree 
upon  the  whole  population  of  the  countries  in- 
volved. 

“I  do  not  need  to  draw  for  you  the  picture 
[ 212  ] 


APPENDIX  A 


of  how  the  burden  has  been  thrown  back  from 
the  front  upon  the  older  men,  upon  the  wom- 
en, upon  the  children,  upon  the  homes  of  the 
civilized  world,  and  how  the  real  strain  of  the 
war  has  come  where  the  eye  of  the  govern- 
ment could  not  reach,  but  where  the  heart  of 
humanity  beat.  We  are  bidden  by  these  peo- 
ple to  see  to  it  that  this  strain  does  not  come 
upon  them  again,  and  I venture  to  say  that  it 
has  been  possible  for  them  to  bear  this  strain 
because  they  hoped  that  those  who  repre- 
sented them  could  get  together  after  this  war 
and  make  another  sacrifice  unnecessary. 

PLANS  FOR  PERMANENT  PEACE 
“It  is  a solemn  obligation  on  our  part,  there- 
fore, to  make  permanent  arrangements  that 
justice  shall  be  rendered  and  peace  main- 
tained. This  is  the  central  object  of  our  meet- 
ing. Settlements  may  be  temporary,  but  the 
action  of  the  nations  in  the  interest  of  peace 
and  justice  must  be  permanent.  We  can  set 
up  permanent  processes.  We  may  not  be  able 
to  set  up  permanent  decisions.  Therefore,  it 
seems  to  me  that  we  must  take,  so  far  as  we 
can,  a picture  of  the  world  into  our  minds. 

“Is  it  not  a startling  circumstance,  for  one 
thing,  that  the  great  discoveries  of  science, 
that  the  quiet  studies  of  men  in  laboratories, 
that  the  thoughtful  developments  which  have 

[ 2i 3 ] 


APPENDIX  A 

taken  place  in  quiet  lecture  rooms,  have  now 
been  turned  to  the  destruction  of  civilization  ? 
The  powers  of  destruction  have  not  so  much 
multiplied  as  gained  facility.  The  enemy 
whom  we  have  just  overcome  had  at  his  seats 
of  learning  some  of  the  principal  centers  of 
scientific  study  and  discovery,  and  he  used 
them  in  order  to  make  destruction  sudden  and 
complete;  and  only  the  watchful,  continuous 
cooperation  of  men  can  see  to  it  that  science 
as  well  as  armed  men  are  kept  within  the  har- 
ness of  civilization. 

U.  S.  CONCERNED  FOR  WORLD  PEACE 

“In  a sense  the  United  States  is  less  inter- 
ested in  this  subject  than  the  other  nations 
here  assembled.  With  her  great  territory  and 
her  extensive  sea  borders,  it  is  less  likely  that 
the  United  States  should  suffer  from  the  at- 
tack of  enemies  than  that  many  of  the  other 
nations  here  should  suffer;  and  the  ardor  of 
the  United  States — for  it  is  a very  deep  and 
genuine  ardor- — for  the  society  of  nations  is 
not  an  ardor  springing  out  of  fear  or  appre- 
hension, but  an  ardor  springing  out  of  the 
ideals  which  have  come  to  consciousness  in 
this  war. 

“In  coming  into  this  war  the  United  States 
never  for  a moment  thought  that  she  was  in- 
tervening in  the  politics  of  Europe  or  the  poli- 

[ 214  ] 


APPENDIX  A 

tics  of  Asia  or  the  politics  of  any  part  of  the 
world.  Her  thought  was  that  all  the  world  had 
now  become  conscious  that  there  was  a single 
cause  which  turned  upon  the  issues  of  this 
war.  That  was  the  cause  of  justice  and  of  lib- 
erty for  men  of  every  kind  and  place.  There- 
fore the  United  States  should  feel  that  its 
part  in  this  war  had  been  played  in  vain  if 
there  ensued  upon  it  a body  of  European  set- 
tlements. It  would  feel  that  it  could  not  take 
part  in  guaranteeing  those  European  settle- 
ments unless  that  guarantee  involved  the  con- 
tinuous superintendence  of  the  peace  of  the 
world  by  the  associated  nations  of  the  world. 

“Therefore,  it  seems  to  me  that  we  must 
concert  our  best  judgment  in  order  to  make 
this  League  of  Nations  a vital  thing — not 
merely  a formal  thing,  not  an  occasional  thing, 
not  a thing  sometimes  called  into  life  to  meet 
an  exigency,  but  always  functioning  in  watch- 
ful attendance  upon  the  interests  of  the  na- 
tions, and  that  its  continuity  should  be  a vital 
continuity;  that  it  should  have  functions  that 
are  continuing  functions  and  that  do  not  per- 
mit an  intermission  of  its  watchfulness  and  of 
its  labor;  that  it  should  be  the  eye  of  the  na- 
tions to  keep  watch  upon  the  common  inter- 
est, an  eye  that  did  not  slumber,  an  eye  that 
was  everywhere  watchful  and  attentive: 

“And  if  we  do  not  make  it  vital,  what  shall 

[ 215  ] 


APPENDIX  A 

we  do?  We  shall  disappoint  the  expectations 
of  the  peoples.  This  is  what  their  thought  cen- 
ters upon.  I have  had  the  very  delightful  ex- 
perience of  visiting  several  nations  since  I 
came  to  this  side  of  the  water,  and  every  time 
the  voice  of  the  body  of  the  people  reached  me 
through  any  representative,  at  the  front  of 
the  plea  stood  the  hope  for  the  League  of  Na- 
tions. Gentlemen,  the  select  classes  of  man- 
kind are  no  longer  the  governors  of  mankind. 
The  fortunes  of  mankind  are  now  in  the  hands 
of  the  plain  people  of  the  whole  world.  Satisfy 
them,  and  you  have  justified  their  confidence 
not  only  but  established  peace.  Fail  to  satisfy 
them,  and  no  arrangement  that  you  can  make 
will  either  set  up  or  steady  the  peace  of  the 
world. 

WHY  THE  U.  S.  FAVORED  A LEAGUE  OF 
NATIONS 

“You  can  imagine,  gentlemen,  I dare  say, 
the  sentiments  and  the  purposes  with  which 
the  representatives  of  the  United  States  sup- 
port this  great  project  for  a League  of  Na- 
tions. We  regard  it  as  the  keystone  of  the 
whole  programme,  which  expressed  our  pur- 
poses and  ideals  in  this  war  and  which  the  as- 
sociated nations  accepted  as  the  basis  of  the 
settlement.  If  we  return  to  the  United  States 
without  having  made  every  effort  in  our  power 

[216] 


APPENDIX  A 

to  realize  this  programme,  we  should  return 
to  meet  the  merited  scorn  of  our  fellow  citi- 
zens. For  they  are  a body  that  constitutes  a 
great  democracy. 

“They  expect  their  leaders  to  speak  their 
thoughts  and  no  private  purpose  of  their  own. 
They  expect  their  representatives  to  be  their 
servants.  We  have  no  choice  but  to  obey  their 
mandate.  But  it  is  with  the  greatest  enthusi- 
asm and  pleasure  that  we  accept  that  man- 
date; and  because  this  is  the  keystone  of  the 
whole  fabric,  we  have  pledged  our  every  pur- 
pose to  it,  as  we  have  to  every  item  of  the  fab- 
ric. We  would  not  dare  abate  a single  item  of 
the  program  which  constitutes  our  instruc- 
tion. We  would  not  dare  compromise  upon 
any  matter  as  the  champion  of  this  thing,  this 
peace  of  the  world,  this  attitude  of  justice, 
this  principle  that  we  are  the  masters  of  no 
people  but  are  here  to  see  that  every  people  in 
the  world  shall  choose  its  own  masters  and 
govern  its  own  destinies,  not  as  we  wish  but 
as  it  wishes. 

SWEEP  AWAY  THE  FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  WAR 

“We  are  here  to  see,  in  short,  that  the  very 
foundations  of  this  war  are  swept  away. 
Those  foundations  were  the  private  choice  of 
small  coteries  of  civil  rulers  and  military 
staffs.  Those  foundations  were  the  aggression 

[ 217  ] 


APPENDIX  A 

of  great  powers  upon  small.  Those  founda- 
tions were  the  folding  together  of  empires  of 
unwilling  subjects  by  the  duress  of  arms. 
Those  foundations  were  the  power  of  small 
bodies  of  men  to  work  their  will  and  use  man- 
kind as  pawns  in  a game.  And  nothing  less 
than  the  emancipation  of  the  world  from  these 
things  will  accomplish  peace.  You  can  see  that 
the  representatives  of  the  United  States  are, 
therefore,  never  put  to  the  embarrassment  of. 
choosing  a way  of  expediency,  because  they 
have  laid  down  for  them  the  unalterable  lines 
of  principle.  And,  thank  God,  those  lines  have 
been  accepted  as  the  lines  of  settlement  by  all 
the  high-minded  men  who  have  had  to  do 
with  the  beginnings  of  this  great  business. 

“I  hope,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  when  it  is 
known,  as  I feel  confident  it  will  be  known, 
that  we  have  adopted  the  principle  of  the 
League  of  Nations  and  mean  to  work  out  that 
principle  in  effective  action,  we  shall  by  that 
single  thing  have  lifted  a great  part  of  the 
load  of  anxiety  from  the  hearts  of  men  every- 
where. We  stand  in  a peculiar  case.  As  I go 
about  the  streets  here  I see  everywhere  the 
American  uniform.  Those  men  came  into  the 
war  after  we  had  uttered  our  purposes.  They 
came  as  crusaders,  not  merely  to  win  a war, 
but  to  win  a cause;  and  I am  responsible  to 
them,  for  it  fell  to  me  to  formulate  the  pur- 


APPENDIX  A 

poses  for  which  I asked  them  to  fight,  and  I, 
like  them,  must  be  a crusader  for  these  things 
whatever  it  costs  and  whatever  it  may  be  nec- 
essary to  do,  in  honor,  to  accomplish  the  ob- 
ject for  which  they  fought. 

“I  have  been  glad  to  find  from  day  to  day 
that  there  is  no  question  of  our  standing  alone 
in  this  matter,  for  there  are  champions  of  this 
cause  upon  every  hand.  I am  merely  avowing 
this  in  order  that  you  may  understand  why, 
perhaps,  it  fell  to  us,  who  are  disengaged  from 
the  politics  of  this  great  continent  and  of  the 
Orient,  to  suggest  that  this  was  the  keystone 
of  the  arch  and  why  it  occurred  to  the  gener- 
ous mind  of  our  president  to  call  upon  me  to 
open  this,  debate.  It  is  not  because  we  alone 
represent  this  idea,  but  because  it  is  our  privi- 
lege to  associate  ourselves  with  you  in  repre- 
senting it. 

“I  have  tried  in  what  I have  said  to  give 
you  the  fountains  of  the  enthusiasm  which  is 
within  us  for  this  thing,  for  those  fountains 
spring,  it  seems  to  me,  from  all  the  ancient 
wrongs  and  sympathies  of  mankind,  and  the 
very  pulse  of  the  world  seems  to  beat  on  the 
surface  in  this  enterprise.” 


[ 2i 9 ] 


B 


President  Wilson s Address  givingthe  Represen- 
tatives of  all  the  Allied  and  Associated  Pow- 
ers at  the  Paris  Peace  Conference  their first 
official  knowledge  of  the  terms  in  which  the 
Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations  provides 
for  maintaining  the  peace  of  the  world  and 
the  international  cooperation  made  possible 
by  the  common  sacrifices  of  the  World  War. 
Phis  Address  was  followed  by  the  accept- 
ance of  the  existing  Covenant  by  the  Repre- 
sentatives of  all  the  Nations  that  heard  this 
authoritative  explanation. 

“Mr.  Chairman:  I have  the  honor  and  as  I es- 
teem it  the  very  great  privilege  of  reporting  in 
the  name  of  the  Commission  constituted  by 
this  Conference  on  the  formulation  of  a plan 
for  the  League  of  Nations.  I am  happy  to  say 
that  it  is  a unanimous  report,  a unanimous  re- 
port from  the  representatives  of  fourteen  na- 
tions—the  United  States,  Great  Britain, 
France,  Italy,  Japan,  Belgium,  Brazil,  China, 
Czecho-Slovakia,  Greece,  Poland,  Portugal, 
Roumania  and  Serbia.  I think  it  will  be  serv- 
iceable and  interesting  if  I,  with  your  permis- 

[ 220  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

sion,  read  the  document  as  the  only  report  we 
have  to  make.” 

President  Wilson  then  proceeded  to  read 
the  Covenant.  When  he  reached  Article  XV 
and  had  read  through  the  second  paragraph, 
he  paused  and  said: 

“I  pause  to  point  out  that  a misconception 
might  arise  in  connection  with  one  of  the  sen- 
tences I have  just  read.  “If  any  party  shall  re- 
fuse to  comply,  the  council  shall  propose 
measures  necessary  to  give  effect  to  the  rec- 
ommendations. 

“A  case  in  point,  a purely  hypothetical  case, 
is  this : Suppose  there  is  in  the  possession  of  a 
particular  power  a piece  of  territory  or  some 
other  substantial  thing  in  dispute,  to  which  it 
is  claimed  that  it  is  not  entitled.  Suppose  that 
the  matter  is  submitted  to  the  Executive 
Council  for  recommendation  as  to  the  settle- 
ment of  the  dispute,  diplomacy  having  failed, 
and  suppose  that  the  decision  is  in  favor  of  the 
party  which  claims  the  subject  matter  of  dis- 
pute, as  against  the  party  which  has  the  sub- 
ject matter  in  dispute.  Then,  if  the  party  in 
possession  of  the  subject  matter  in  dispute 
merely  sits  still  and  does  nothing,  it  has  ac- 
cepted the  decision  of  the  Council  in  the  sense 
that  it  makes  no  resistance,  but  something 
must  be  done  to  see  that  it  surrenders  the  sub- 
ject matter  in  dispute. 

[ 221  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

“In  such  a case,  the  only  case  contemplated, 
it  is  provided  that  the  Executive  Council  may 
then  consider  what  steps  may  be  necessary  to 
oblige  the  party  against  whom  judgment  has 
been  given  to  comply  with  the  decisions  of  the 
Council.” 

After  reading  Article  XIX,  President  Wil- 
son also  stopped  and  said: 

“Let  me  say  that  before  being  embodied  in 
this  document  this  was  the  subject  matter  of 
very  careful  discussion  by  representatives  of 
the  five  greater  parties  and  that  their  unani- 
mous conclusion  is  the  matter  embodied  in 
this  Article.” 

After  reading  the  Covenant  throughout, 
President  Wilson  proceeded: 

“It  gives  me  pleasure  to  add  to  this  formal 
reading  of  the  result  of  our  labors  that  the 
character  of  the  discussion  which  occurred  at 
the  sittings  of  the  Commission  was  not  only 
of  the  most  constructive  but  of  the  most  en- 
couraging sort.  It  was  obvious  throughout  our 
discussions  that,  although  there  were  subjects 
upon  which  there  were  individual  differences 
of  judgment,  with  regard  to  the  method  by 
which  our  objects  should  be  obtained,  there 
was  practically  at  no  point  any  serious  differ- 
ence of  opinion  as  to  the  objects  which  we 
were  seeking.  Indeed,  while  these  debates 
were  not  made  the  opportunity  for  the  ex- 

[ 222  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

pression  of  enthusiasms  and  sentiments,  I 
think  the  other  members  of  the  Commission 
will  agree  with  me  that  there  was  an  under- 
tone of  high  respect  and  of  enthusiasm  for  the 
thing  we  were  trying  to  do,  which  was  heart- 
ening throughout  every  meeting,  because  we 
felt  that  in  a way  this  Conference  had  en- 
trusted to  us  the  expression  of  one  of  its  high- 
est and  most  important  purposes,  to  see  to  it 
that  the  concord  of  the  world  in  the  future 
with  regard  to  the  objects  of  justice  should 
not  be  subject  to  doubt  or  uncertainty,  that 
the  cooperation  of  the  great  body  of  nations 
should  be  assured  from  the  first  in  the  main- 
tenance of  peace  upon  the  terms  of  honor  and 
of  strict  regard  for  international  obligation. 
The  compulsion  of  that  task  was  constantly 
upon  us,  and  at  no  point  was  there  shown  the 
slightest  desire  to  do  anything  but  suggest  the 
best  means  to  accomplish  that  great  object. 
There  is  very  great  significance,  therefore,  in 
the  fact  that  the  result  was  reached  unani- 
mously. 

“Fourteen  nations  were  represented,  among 
them  all  of  those  powers  which  for  conveni- 
ence we  have  called  the  Great  Powers,  and 
among  the  rest  a representation  of  the  great- 
est variety  of  circumstance  and  interest.  So  I 
think  we  are  justified  in  saying  that  it  was  a 
representative  group  of  the  members  of  this 

[ 22 3 ] 


APPENDIX  B 

great  conference.  The  significance  of  the  re- 
sult, therefore,  has  that  deepest  of  all  mean- 
ings, the  union  of  wills  in  a common  purpose, 
a union  of  wills  which  cannot  be  resisted,  and 
which  I dare  say  no  nation  will  run  the  risk  of 
attempting  to  resist. 

THE  LEAGUE  SIMPLE 

“Now  as  to  the  character  of  the  result.  While 
it  has  consumed  some  time  to  read  this  docu- 
ment, I think  you  will  see  at  once  that  it  is, 
after  all,  very  simple,  and  in  nothing  so  sim- 
ple as  in  the  structure  which  it  suggests  for 
the  League  of  Nations — a body  of  Delegates, 
an  Executive  Council,  and  a Permanent  Sec- 
retariat. When  it  came  to  the  question  of 
determining  the  character  of  the  representa- 
tion in  the  body  of  delegates,  we  were  all 
aware  of  a feeling  which  is  current  throughout 
the  world.  Inasmuch  as  I am  stating  it  in  the 
presence  of  official  representatives  of  the 
various  Governments  here  present,  including 
myself,  I may  say  that  there  is  a universal 
feeling  that  the  world  cannot  rest  satisfied 
with  merely  official  guidance. 

“There  has  reached  us  through  many  chan- 
nels the  feeling  that  if  the  deliberative  body  of 
the  League  of  Nations  was  merely  to  be  a 
body  of  officials  representing  the  various  gov- 
ernments, the  peoples  of  the  world  would  not 

[ 224  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

be  sure  that  some  of  the  mistakes  which  pre- 
occupied officials  had  admittedly  made  might 
not  be  repeated.  It  was  impossible  to  conceive 
a method  or  an  assembly  so  large  and  various 
as  to  be  really  representative  of  the  great 
body  of  the  peoples  of  tne  world,  because,  as  I 
roughly  reckon  it,  we  represent  as  we  sit 
around  this  table  more  tl  an  twelve  hundred 
million  people. 

“You  cannot  have  a representative  assem- 
bly of  twelve  hundred  million  people,  but  if 
you  leave  it  to  each  government;  to  have,  if  it 
pleases,  one  or  two  or  three  representatives, 
though  only  a single  vote,  it  may  vai  / its  rep- 
resentation from  time  to  time,  not  only,  but  it 
may  govern  the  choice  of  its  several  represen- 
tatives, if  it  should  have  several,  in  different 
ways. 


VARIETY  OF  REPRESENTATION 

“Therefore,  we  thought  that  this  was  a proper 
and  a very  prudent  concession  to  the  practi- 
cally universal  opinion  of  plain  men  every- 
where that  they  wanted  the  door  left  open 
to  a variety  of  representation  instead  of  being 
confined  to  a single  official  body  with  which 
they  might  or  might  not  find  themselves  in 
sympathy. 

“And  you  will  notice  that  this  body  has  un- 
limited rights  of  discussion — I mean  of  discus- 

[ 225  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

sion  of  anything  that  falls  within  the  field  of 
international  relationship— and  that  it  is  es- 
pecially agreed  that  war  or  international  mis- 
understandings or  anything  that  may  lead  to 
friction  and  trouble  is  everybody’s  business, 
because  it  may  affect  the  peace  of  the  world. 
And  in  order  to  safeguard  the  popular  power 
so  far  as  we  could  of  this  representative  body, 
it  is  provided  you  will  notice,  that  when  a 
subject  is  submitted,  not  to  arbitration,  but 
to  discussion  by  the  executive  council,  it  can, 
be  drawn  out  of  the  executive  council  to  the 
larger  forum  of  the  general  body  of  the  dele- 
gates, because  throughout  this  instrument  we 
are  depending  primarily  and  chiefly  upon  one 
great  force,  and  that  is  the  moral  force  of  the 
public  opinion  of  the  world — the  pleasing 
and  clarifying  and  compelling  influences  of 
publicity;  so  that  intrigues  can  no  longer  have 
their  coverts,  so  that  designs  that  are  sinister 
can  at  any  time  be  drawn  into  the  open,  so 
that  those  things  that  are  destroyed  by  the 
light  may  be  promptly  destroyed  by  the  over- 
whelming light  of  the  universal  expression  of 
the  condemnation  of  the  world. 

“Armed  force  is  in  the  background  in  this 
program,  but  it  is  in  the  background,  and  if 
the  moral  force  of  the  world  will  not  suffice, 
the  physical  force  of  the  world  shall.  But  that 


[ 226  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

is  the  last  resort,  because  this  is  intended  as  a 
constitution  of  peace,  not  as  a league  of  war. 

NOT  A STRAITJACKET 

“The  simplicity  of  the  document  seems  to 
me  to  be  one  of  its  chief  virtues,  because, 
speaking  for  myself,  I was  unable  to  foresee 
the  variety  of  circumstances  with  which  this 
League  would  have  to  deal.  I was  unable, 
therefore,  to  plan  all  the  machinery  that 
might  be  necessary  to  meet  differing  and  un- 
expected contingencies.  Therefore,  I should 
say  of  this  document  that  it  is  not  a strait 
jacket  but  a vehicle  of  life.  A living  thing  is 
born,  and  we  must  see  to  it  that  the  clothes 
we  put  upon  it  do  not  hamper  it.  It  is  a vehi- 
cle of  power,  but  a vehicle  in  which  power 
may  be  varied  at  the  discretion  of  those  who 
exercise  it  and  in  accordance  with  the  chang- 
ing circumstances  of  the  time.  And  yet,  while 
it  is  elastic,  while  it  is  general  in  its  terms,  it  is 
definite  in  the  one  thing  that  we  are  called 
upon  to  make  definite:  It  is  a definite  guaran- 
tee of  peace.  It  is  a definite  guarantee  against 
aggression.  It  is  a definite  guarantee  against 
the  things  which  have  just  come  near  bring- 
ing the  whole  structure  of  civilization  to  the 
brink  of  ruin. 


[ 227  ] 


APPENDIX  B 


LABOR  GIVEN  NEW  STATUS 

“Its  purposes  do  not  for  a moment  lie  vague. 
Its  purposes  are  declared,  and  its  powers  made 
unmistakable.  It  is  not  in  contemplation  that 
this  should  be  merely  a League  to  secure  the 
peace  of  the  world.  It  is  a League  which  can  be 
used  for  cooperation  in  any  international  mat- 
ter. That  is  the  significance  of  the  provision 
introduced  concerning  labor.  There  are  many 
ameliorations  of  labor  conditions  which  can 
be  effected  by  conference  and  discussion.  I an- 
ticipate that  there  will  be  a very  great  useful- 
ness in  the  bureau  of  labor  which  it  is  contem- 
plated shall  be  set  up  by  the  League.  While 
men  and  women  who  work  have  been  in  the 
background  through  long  ages,  and  some- 
times seem  to  be  forgotten,  while  governments 
have’had  their  watchful  and  suspicious  eyes 
upon  the  maneuvers  of  one  another,  while  the 
thought  of  statesmen  has  been  about  struc- 
tural action  and  the  large  transactions  of 
commerce  and  of  finance. 

“Now,  if  I may  believe  the  picture  which  I 
see,  there  comes  into  the  foreground  the  great 
body  of  the  laboring  people  of  the  world,  the 
men  and  women  and  children  upon  whom  the 
great  burden  of  sustaining  the  world  must 
from  day  to  day  fall,  whether  we  wish  it  to  do 
so  or  not;  people  who  go  to  bed  tired  and 

[ 228  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

wake  up  without  the  stimulation  of  lively 
hope.  These  people  will  be  drawn  into  the 
field  of  international  consultation  and  help, 
and  will  be  among  the  wards  of  the  combined 
governments  of  the  world.  There  is,  I take 
leave  to  say,  a very  great  step  in  advance  in 
the  mere  conception  of  that. 

TREATIES  MUST  BE  PUBLISHED 

“Then,  as  you  will  notice,  there  is  an  impera- 
tive article  concerning  the  publicity  of  all 
international  agreements.  Henceforth  no 
member  of  the  League  can  claim  any  agree- 
ment valid  which  it  has  not  registered  with 
the  Secretary  General,  in  whose  office,  of 
course,  it  will  be  subject  to  the  examination 
of  anybody  representing  a member  of  the 
League.  And  the  duty  is  laid  upon  the  Secre- 
tary General  to  publish  every  document  of 
that  sort  at  the  earliest  possible  time. 

“I  suppose  most  persons  who  have  not  been 
conversant  with  the  business  of  foreign  offices 
do  not  realize  how  many  hundreds  of  these 
agreements  are  made  in  a single  year,  and 
how  difficult  it  might  be  to  publish  the  more 
unimportant  of  them  immediately — how  un- 
interesting it  would  be  to  most  of  the  world  to 
publish  them  immediately,  but  even  they 
must  be  published  just  as  soon  as  it  is  possible 
for  the  Secretary  General  to  publish  them. 

[ 229  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

“Then  there  is  a feature  about  this  Cove- 
nant which  to  my  mind  is  one  of  the  greatest 
and  most  satisfactory  advances  that  have 
been  made.  We  are  done  with  annexations  of 
helpless  people,  meant  in  some  instances  by 
some  powers  to  be  used  merely  for  exploita- 
tion. We  recognized  in  the  most  solemn  man- 
ner that  the  helpless  and  undeveloped  peoples 
of  the  world,  being  in  that  condition,  put  an 
obligation  upon  us  to  look  after  their  interests 
primarily  before  we  use  them  for  our  interests; 
and  that  in  all  cases  of  this  sort  hereafter  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  League  to  see  that  the 
nations  who  are  assigned  as  the  tutors  and  ad- 
visers and  directors  of  those  people  shall  look 
to  their  interest  and  to  their  development  be- 
fore they  look  to  the  interests  and  material 
desires  of  the  mandatory  nation  itself. 

“There  has  been  no  greater  advance  than 
this,  gentlemen.  If  you  look  back  upon  the 
history  of  the  world  you  will  see  how  helpless 
peoples  have  too  often  been  a prey  to  powers 
that  had  no  conscience  in  the  matter.  It  has 
been  one  of  the  many  distressing  revelations 
of  recent  years  that  the  Great  Power  which 
has  just  been,  happily,  defeated  put  intoler- 
able burdens  and  injustices  upon  the  helpless 
people  of  some  of  the  colonies  which  it  an- 
nexed to  itself;  that  its  interest  was  rather 
their  extermination  than  their  development; 

[ 230  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

that  the  desire  was  to  possess  their  land  for 
European  purposes,  and  not  to  enjoy  their 
confidence  in  order  that  mankind  might  be 
lifted  in  those  places  to  the  next  higher  level. 

“Now,  the  world,  expressing  its  conscience 
in  law,  says  there  is  an  end  of  that,  that  our 
consciences  shall  be  applied  to  this  thing. 
States  will  be  picked  out  which  have  already 
shown  that  they  can  exercise  a conscience  in 
this  matter,  and  under  their  tutelage  the  help- 
less peoples  of  the  world  will  come  into  a new 
light  and  into  a new  hope. 

SYMPATHY  IN  IT 

“So  I think  I can  say  of  this  document  that 
it  is  at  one  and  the  same  time  a practical  doc- 
ument and  a humane  document.  There  is  a 
pulse  of  sympathy  in  it.  There  is  a compulsion 
of  conscience  throughout  it.  It  is  practical, 
and  yet  it  is  intended  to  purify,  to  rectify,  to 
elevate.  And  I want  to  say  that,  so  far  as  my 
observation  instructs  me,  this  is  in  one  sense 
a belated  document.  I believe  that  the  con- 
science of  the  world  has  long  been  prepared  to 
express  itself  in  some  such  way.  We  are  not 
just  now  discovering  our  sympathy  for  these 
people  and  our  interest  in  them.  We  are  sim- 
ply expressing  it,  for  it  has  long  been  felt,  and 
in  the  administration  of  the  affairs  of  more 
than  one  of  the  great  States  represented  here 

[ 231  ] 


APPENDIX  B 

— so  far  as  I know,  of  all  the  great  States  that' 
are  represented  here — that  humane  impulse 
has  already  expressed  itself  in  their  dealings 
with  their  colonies,  whose  peoples  were  yet  at 
a low  stage  of  civilization. 

“We  have  had  many  instances  of  colonies 
lifted  into  the  sphere  of  complete  self-govern- 
ment. This  is  not  the  discovery  of  a principle. 
It  is  the  universal  application  of  a principle. 
It  is  the  agreement  of  the  great  nations  which 
have  tried  to  live  by  these  standards  in  their 
separate  administrations  to  unite  in  seeing 
that  their  common  force  and  their  common 
thought  and  intelligence  are  lent  to  this  great 
and  humane  enterprise.  I think  it  is  an  occa- 
sion, therefore,  for  the  most  profound  satis- 
faction that  this  humane  decision  should  have 
been  reached  in  a matter  for  which  the  world 
has  long  been  waiting  and  until  a very  recent 
period  thought  that  it  was  still  too  early  to 
hope. 

“Many  terrible  things  have  come  out  of  this 
war,  gentlemen,  but  some  very  beautiful 
things  have  come  out  of  it.  Wrong  has  been 
defeated,  but  the  rest  of  the  world  has  been 
more  conscious  than  it  ever  was  before  of  the 
majesty  of  right.  People  that  were  suspicious 
of  one  another  can  now  live  as  friends  and 
comrades  in  a single  family,  and  desire  to  do 
so.  The  miasma  of  distrust,  of  intrigue,  is 

[ 23  2 ] 


APPENDIX  B 

cleared  away.  Men  are  looking  eye  to  eye  and 
saying,  ‘We  are  brothers  and  have  a common 
purpose.  We  did  not  realize  it  before,  but  now 
we  do  realize  it,  and  this  is  our  Covenant  of 
fraternity  and  of  friendship’.” 


[ 233  ] 


c 


President  Wilson's  Advisers , the  American  Ex- 
perts—at  the  Paris  Peace  Conference. 

The  Official  Commissioners  representing  the 
United  States  at  the  Conference,  were  Presi- 
dent Wilson,  Hon.  Robert  Lansing,  Secretary 
of  State,  Hon.  Henry  White,  formerly  United 
States  Ambassador  at  Paris  and  at  Rome, 
Hon.  Edward  M.  House  and  General  Tasker 
H.  Bliss,  United  States  Army. 

To  the  courtesy  of  Mr.  George  Creel  and 
Mr.  Thomas  W.  Lamont,  I am  indebted  for 
permission  to  quote  two  of  the  many  inter- 
esting official  and  public  statements  made  by 
President  Wilson  as  to  his  entire  confidence 
in  and  dependence  upon  the  gentlemen  whose 
names  appear  in  this  Appendix,  during  the 
important  work  of  the  Peace  Conference. 

Mr.  Creel  has  made  of  record  in  his  book, 
“The  War,  The  World,  and  Wilson,”  how 
President  Wilson,  on  the  way  to  Paris,  as- 
sured these  gentlemen: 

“You  are,  in  truth,  my  advisers,  for  when  I 
ask  you  for  information  I will  have  no  way  of 
checking  it  up,  and  must  act  upon  it  unques- 

[ 234  ] 


APPENDIX  C 

tioningly.  We  will  be  deluged  with  claims 
plausibly  and  convincingly  presented.  It  will 
be  your  task  to  establish  the  truth  or  falsity 
of  these  claims  out  of  your  specialized  knowl- 
edge, so  that  my  positions  may  be  taken 
fairly  and  intelligently.” 

Mr.  Lamont  has  testified: 

“I  never  saw  a man  more  considerate  of 
those  of  his  coadjutors  who  were  working  im- 
mediately with  him,  nor  a man  more  ready  to 
give  them  credit  with  the  other  chiefs  of 
state.  Again  and  again  he  would  say  to  Mr. 
Lloyd  George  or  Mr.  Clemenceau:  “My  ex- 
pert here,  Mr.  So-and-So,  tells  me  such  and 
such,  and  I believe  he  is  right.  You  will  have 
to  argue  with  him  if  you  want  me  to  change 
my  opinion.” 

Economic  and  Commercial  Questions 
Bernard  M.  Baruch  Alex.  Legg 

Vance  McCormick  Charles  McDowell 

Frank  W.  Taussig  Leland  Summers 

Financial  Questions 

Norman  H.  Davis  Thomas  W.  Lamont 

John  Foster  Dulles  Albert  Strauss 

Judicial  Questions 

David  Hunter  Miller  James  C.  Pennie 

James  Brown  Scott  Frederick  Neilson 

Chandler  Anderson 


Questions  of  Ways  and  Means 
Herbert  Hoover 


Wei-v 


[ 235  ] 


APPENDIX  C 


Questions  of  Navigation  and  Labor 

E.  N.  Hurley  Samuel  Gompers 

Questions  of  Naval  Affairs 
Admiral  W.  S.  Benson,  U.  S.  Navy 
Questions  of  Military  Affairs 
Major  General  F.  J.  Kernan,  U.  S.  Army 
‘Technical  Experts 

Doctor  Sidney  E.  Mezes,  Director 

Chief  Territorial  Adviser  and  Executive  Officer  of  the  Section 
of  Territorial , Economic  and  Political  Intelligence 
Doctor  Isaiah  Bowman 
Questions  of  Economics  and  Statistics 
Professor  Allyn  A.  Young 
Questions  of  Ethnography 

Professor  Roland  B.  Dixon  Captain  W.  C.  Farabee 
Questions  of  History 
Professor  James  T.  Shotwell 
Questions  of  Geography 
Professor  Mark  Jefferson 
Questions  as  to  Colonies 
George  Louis  Beer 
Questions  as  to  Germany 
Doctor  Wallace  Notestein 
Questions  as  to  Austria-Hungary 
Professor  Charles  Seymour 
Questions  as  to  Turkey 
Professor  W.  L.  Westermann 
Questions  as  to  the  Balkans 
Professor  Clive  Day 


[236] 


APPENDIX  C 


Questions  as  to  Alsace-Lorraine  and  Belgium 
Professor  Charles  H.  Haskins 
Questions  as  to  the  Orient 

Captain  S.  K.  Hornbeck  Professor  E.  T.  Williams 
Questions  as  to  Italy 

Professor  W.  E.  Lunt  Major  D.  W.  Johnson 

Questions  as  to  Russia  and  Poland 
Professor  R.  H.  Lord  Doctor  Isaiah  Bowman 


Secretary  General 

Hon.  Joseph  Clark  Grew,  Minister  Plenipotentiary 
Secretaries 


Arthur  Hugh  Frazier 
Colonel  U.  S.  Grant,  3rd. 
Christian  A.  Herter 
Grafton  Winthrop  Minot 
Lt.  Chester  Burden,  U.S.A. 


I.eland  Harrison 
Alexander  C.  Kirk 
Philip  H.  Patchin 
Gordon  Auchincloss 
Capt.  James  A.  Garfield 


Capt.  Van  S.  Merle-Smith,  U.S.A. 
Political  and  Diplomatic  Advisers 
Ellis  Loring  Dresel,  Chief  of  Section 


Jordan  Herbert  Stabler,  Chief  of  the  Latin  American 
Bureau  of  the  Department  of  State 

Frederic  R.  Dolbeare  Allen  W.  Dulles 
E.  T.  Williams  Sidney  Y.  Smith 

J.  F.  D.[Paul,  Attache 


[ 237  ] 


D 


Some  Facts  Not  Generally  Known  to  Students 
and  to  Critics  of  the  Covenant  of  the  League 
of  Nations. 

The  following  copies  of  official  cablegrams 
show  how  President  Wilson,  when  at  the  Paris 
Peace  Conference,  received  and  welcomed  the 
suggestions  as  to  changes  in  the  Covenant  of 
the  League  of  Nations  proposed  by  former 
President  William  H.  Taft  and  former  Secre- 
tary of  State,  Elihu  Root. 

The  Covenant  referred  to  in  these  cable- 
grams was  the  first  form  of  that  document 
President  Wilson  had  brought  from  Paris  and 
discussed  with  the  Members  of  the  Foreign 
Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate  and  the 
Foreign  Affairs  Committee  of  the  House  of 
Representatives. 

When  it  is  remembered  that  Mr.  Root  be- 
cause of  his  record  as  one  of  the  foremost  in- 
ternational lawyers  of  the  world,  was  specially 
invited  by  many  of  the  distinguished  jurists 
of  Europe  to  be  one  of  the  men  to  establish 
the  existing  World  Court;  and  that  Mr.  Taft 
is  now  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States 

[ 238  ] 


APPENDIX  D 


Supreme  Court,  the  thoughtful  reader  and 
student  of  the  League  will  find  it  interesting 
to  note  what  modifications  such  eminent 
American  lawyers  believed  would  make  the 
Covenant  entirely  acceptable  to  the  United 
States  Senate.  A comparison  of  the  sugges- 
tions made  by  Mr.  Taft  and  Mr.  Root,  with 
the  Covenant  as  it  is  today,  will  prove  that 
before  it  was  adopted  in  its  final  form  by  all 
the  Nations  represented  at  the  Paris  Peace 
Conference,  and  before  he  submitted  it  to  the 
United  States  Senate,  President  Wilson  suc- 
ceeded in  having  written  into  it  practically 
every  suggestion  made  by  Mr.  Taft  and 
by  Mr.  Root,  either  in  the  language  they 
proposed  or  in  terms  that  very  specifically 
provide  for  the  matters  they  wished  made 
definite.  h.  f. 


Cablegram 


The  White  House,  Washington, 
16  March,  1919 


President  Wilson, 

Paris. 

Former  President  Taft  asks  if  he  may  cable  to  you  di- 
rect, for  your  consideration  only,  some  suggestions 
about  which  he  has  been  thinking  a great  deal  and 
which  he  would  like  to  have  you  consider.  He  said  that 
these  suggestions  do  not  look  to  the  change  of  the 
structure  of  the  League,  the  plan  of  its  action  or  its 
real  character,  but  simply  to  removing  objections  in 
minds  of  conscientious  Americans,  who  are  anxious  for 
a league  of  nations,  whose  fears  have  been  aroused  by 


[ 239  ] 


APPENDIX  D 

suggested  constructions  of  the  League  which  its  lan- 
guage does  not  justify  and  whose  fears  could  be  re- 
moved without  any  considerable  change  of  language. 

Tumulty. 


Cablegram-Paris 

Received  at  White  House 
March  18,  1919 

In  reply  to  your  number  sixteen,  appreciate  Mr.  Taft’s 
offer  suggestions  and  would  welcome  them.  The  sooner 
they  are  sent  the  better.  You  need  give  yourself  no 
concern  about  my  yielding  anything  with  regard  to  the 
embodiment  of  the  proposed  convention  with  Turkey. 

Woodrow  Wilson. 


Cablegram. 

The  White  House,  Washington. 
18  March,  1919 

President  Wilson 
Paris. 


Following  from  Wm.  H.  Taft. 

“If  you  bring  back  the  Treaty  with  the  League  of  Na- 
tions in  it,  make  more  specific  reservations  of  the  Mon- 
roe Doctrine,  fix  a term  for  the  duration  of  the  League 
and  the  limit  of  armament,  require  expressly  unanim- 
ity of  action  in  Executive  Council  and  body  of  Dele- 
gates, and  add  to  Article  XV  a provision  that  where 
the  Executive  Council  of  the  Body  of  Delegates  finds 
the  difference  to  grow  out  of  an  exclusively  domestic 
policy,  it  shall  recommend  no  settlement,  the  ground 
will  be  completely  cut  from  under  the  opponents  of  the 
League  in  the  Senate.  Addition  to  Article  XV  will  an- 
swer objection  as  to  Japanese  immigration  as  well  as 
tariffs  under  Article  XXI.  Reservation  of  the  Monroe 
Doctrine  might  be  as  follows: 


[ 240  ] 


APPENDIX  D 

Any  American  state  or  states  may  protect  the  in- 
tegrity of  American  territory  and  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  government  whose  territory  it  is, 
whether  a member  of  the  League  or  not,  and  may, 
in  the  interests  of  American  peace,  object  to  and 
prevent  the  further  transfer  of  American  territory 
or  sovereignty  to  any  European  or  non-American 
power. 

Monroe  Doctrine  reservation  alone  would  probably 
carry  the  treaty  but  the  others  would  make  it  cer- 
tain. (Signed  Wm.  H.  Taft.)”  Tumulty. 

Cablegram 

The  White  House,  Washington. 

2i  March,  1919. 

President  Wilson, 

Paris. 

The  following  letter  from  Hon.  Wm.  H.  Taft. 

“I  have  thought  perhaps  it  might  help  more  if  I was 
somewhat  more  specific  than  I was  in  the  memoran- 
dum note  I sent  you  yesterday,  and  I therefore  enclose 
another  memorandum. 

DURATION  OF  THE  COVENANT 

Add  to  the  Preamble  the  following: 

“From  the  obligations  of  which  any  member  of 
the  League  may  withdraw  after  July  1,  1929,  by 
two  years  notice  in  writing,  duly  filed  with  the 
Secretary  General  of  the  League.” 

Explanation 

I have  no  doubt  that  the  construction  put  upon 
the  agreement  would  be  what  I understand  the 
President  has  already  said  it  should  be,  namely 
that  any  nation  may  withdraw  from  it  upon  rea- 
sonable notice,  which  perhaps  would  be  a year.  I 


[ 24I  ] 


APPENDIX  D 

think,  however,  it  might  strengthen  the  Covenant 
if  there  was  a fixed  duration.  It  would  completely 
remove  the  objection  that  it  is  perpetual  in  its 
operation. 

DURATION  OF  ARMAMENT  LIMIT 

Add  to  the  first  paragraph  of  Article  VIII,  the  fol- 
lowing: 

“At  the  end  of  every  five  years,  such  limits  of  ar- 
mament for  the  several  governments  shall  be  re- 
examined by  the  Executive  Council,  and  agreed 
upon  by  them  as  in  the  first  instance.” 

Explanation 

The  duration  of  the  obligation  to  limit  armament, 
which  now  may  only  be  changed  by  consent  of  the 
Executive  Council,  has  come  in  for  criticism.  I 
should  think  this  might  be  avoided,  without  in 
any  way  injuring  the  Covenant.  Perhaps  three 
years  is  enough,  but  I should  think  five  years 
would  be  better. 

Unanimous  Action  by  the  Executive  Council  or  Body 
of  Delegates 

Insert  in  Article  IV,  after  the  first  paragraph,  the  fol- 
lowing: 

“Other  action  taken  or  recommendations  made  by 
the  Executive  Council  or  body  of  Delegates  shall 
be  by  the  unanimous  action  of  the  countries  repre- 
sented by  the  members  or  delegates,  unless  other- 
wise specifically  stated.” 

Explanation 

Great  objection  is  made  to  the  power  of  the  Ex- 
ecutive Council  by  a majority  of  the  members  and 
the  Body  of  Delegates  to  do  the  things  which  they 
are  authorized  to  do  in  the  Covenant.  In  view  of 
the  specific  provision  that  the  Executive  Council 

[ 242  ] 


APPENDIX  D 

and  the  Body  of  Delegates  may  act  by  a majority 
of  its  members  as  to  their  procedure,  I feel  confi- 
dent that,  except  in  cases  where  otherwise  pro- 
vided, both  bodies  can  only  act  by  unanimous 
vote  of  the  countries  represented.  If  that  be  the 
right  construction,  then  there  can  be  no  objection 
to  have  it  specifically  stated,  and  it  will  remove 
emphatic  objection  already  made  on  this  ground. 
It  is  a complete  safeguard  against  involving  the 
United  States  primarily  in  small  distant  wars  to 
which  the  United  States  has  no  immediate  rela- 
tion, for  the  reason  that  the  plan  for  taking  care 
of  such  a war,  to  be  recommended  or  advised  by 
the  Executive  Council,  must  be  approved  by  a 
representative  of  the  United  States  on  the  Board. 

MONROE  DOCTRINE 

Add  to  Article  X 

{a)  “A  state  or  states  of  America,  a member  or 
members  of  the  League,  and  competent  to  ful- 
fill this  obligation  in  respect  to  American  terri- 
tory or  independence,  may,  in  event  of  the  ag- 
gression, actual  or  threatened,  expressly  as- 
sume the  obligation  and  relieve  the  European 
or  non-American  members  of  the  League  from 
it  until  they  shall  be  advised  by  such  Ameri- 
can state  or  states  of  the  need  for  their  aid.” 

0 b ) “Any  such  American  state  or  states  may  pro- 
tect the  integrity  of  any  American  territory 
and  the  sovereignty  of  the  government  whose 
territory  it  is,  whether  a member  of  the  League 
or  not,  and  may,  in  the  interest  of  American 
peace,  object  to  and  prevent  the  further  trans- 
fer of  American  territory  or  sovereignty  to  any 
American  or  non-American  power.” 


[ 243  ] 


APPENDIX  D 


Explanation 

Objection  has  been  made  that  under  Article  X, 
European  governments  would  come  to  America 
with  force  and  be  concerned  in  matters  from 
which  heretofore  the  United  States  has  excluded 
them.  This  is  not  true,  because  Spain  fought  Chili, 
in  Seward’s  time,  without  objection  from  the 
United  States,  and  so  Germany  and  England  in- 
stituted a blockade  against  Venezuela  in  Roose- 
velt’s time.  This  fear  could  be  removed,  however, 
by  the  first  of  the  above  paragraphs. 

Paragraph  ( b ) is  the  Monroe  Doctrine  pure  and 
simple.  I forwarded  this  in  my  first  memorandum. 
It  will  be  observed  that  Article  X only  covers  the 
integrity  and  independence  of  members  of  the 
League.  There  may  be  some  American  countries 
which  are  not  sufficiently  responsible  to  make  it 
wise  to  invite  them  into  the  League.  This  second 
paragraph  covers  them. The  expression  “European 
or  non-American”  is  inserted  for  the  purpose  of 
indicating  that  Great  Britain,  though  it  has  Am- 
erican dominion,  is  not  to  acquire  further  terri- 
tority  or  sovereignty. 

JAPANESE  IMMIGRATION  AND  TARIFFS 

Add  to  Article  XV 

“If  the  difference  between  the  parties  shall  be 
found  by  the  Executive  Council  or  the  Body  of 
Delegates  to  be  a question  which  by  international 
law  is  solely  within  the  domestic  jurisdiction  and 
polity  of  one  of  the  parties,  it  shall  so  report  and 
not  recommend  a settlement  of  the  dispute.” 
Explanation 

Objection  is  made  to  Article  XV  that  under  its 
terms  the  United  States  would  be  bound  by  unani- 
mous recommendation  for  settlement  of  a dispute 

[ 2 44  1 


APPENDIX  D 

in  respect  to  any  issue  foreign  or  domestic;  that  it 
therefore  might  be  affected  seriously,  and  unjust- 
ly, by  recommendation  forbidding  tariffs  on  im- 
portations. In  my  judgment,  we  could  only  rely 
on  the  public  opinion  of  the  world  evidenced  by 
the  Body  of  Delegates,  not  to  interfere  with  our 
domestic  legislation  and  action.  Nor  do  I think 
that  under  the  League  as  it  is,  we  covenant  to 
abide  by  a unanimous  recommendation.  But  if 
there  is  a specific  exception  made  in  respect  to 
matters  completely  within  the  domestic  jurisdic- 
tion and  legislation  of  a country,  the  whole  criti- 
cism is  removed.  The  Republican  senators  are  try- 
ing to  stir  up  anxiety  among  Republicans  lest  this 
be  a limitation  upon  our  tariff.  The  President  has 
already  specifically  met  the  objection  as  to  limita- 
tion upon  the  tariff  when  the  Fourteen  points  were 
under  discussion.  Nevertheless  in  this  respect  to 
the  present  language  of  the  Covenant,  it  would 
help  much  to  meet  and  remove  objections,  and  cut 
the  ground  under  senatorial  obstructions. 

PROSPECT  OF  RATIFICATION 
My  impression  is  that  if  the  one  article  already  sent, 
on  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  be  inserted  in  the  Treaty, 
sufficient  Republicans  who  signed  the  Round  Robin 
would  probably  retreat  from  their  position  and  vote 
for  ratification  so  that  it  would  carry.  If  the  other  sug- 
gestions were  adopted,  I feel  confident  that  all  but  a 
few  who  oppose  any  league  would  be  driven  to  accept 
them  and  to  stand  for  the  League.” 

(End  Letter)  Tumulty. 


[ 245  ] 


APPENDIX  D 

March  27,  1919. 

Admission — Paris. 

For  Secretary  Lansing  from  Polk. 

Following  are  proposed  amendments  to  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  League  of  Nations  which  have  been  drafted 
by  Mr.  Root. 

First  Amendment:  Strike  out  Article  XIII,  and  insert 
the  following: 

The  high  contracting  powers  agree  to  refer  to  the 
existing  Permanent  Court  of  Arbitration  at  the 
Hague,  or  to  the  Court  of  Arbitral  Justice  pro- 
posed at  the  Second  Hague  Conference  when  es- 
tablished, or  to  some  other  tribunal,  all  disputes 
between  them  (including  those  affecting  honour 
and  vital  interests)  which  are  of  a justiciable  char- 
acter, and  which  the  powers  concerned  have  failed 
to  settle  by  diplomatic  methods.  The  powers  so 
referring  to  arbitration  agree  to  accept  and  give 
effect  to  the  award  of  the  Tribunal. 

Disputes  of  a justiciable  character  are  defined 
as  disputes  as  to  the  interpretation  of  a treaty,  as 
to  any  question  of  international  law,  as  to  the 
existence  of  any  fact  which  if  established  would 
constitute  a breach  of  any  international  obliga- 
tion, or  as  to  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  repara- 
tion to  be  made  for  any  such  breach. 

Any  question  which  may  arise  as  to  whether  a dis- 
pute is  of  a justiciable  character  is  to  be  referred 
for  decision  to  the  Court  of  Arbitral  Justice  when 
constituted,  or,  until  it  is  constituted,  to  the 
existing  Permanent  Court  of  Arbitration  at  the 
Hague. 

Second  Amendment.  Add  to  Article  XIV  the  following 
paragraphs: 

The  Executive  Council  shall  call  a general  confer- 
ence of  the  powers  to  meet  not  less  than  two  years 

[ 246  ] 


APPENDIX  D 

or  more  than  five  years  after  the  signing  of  this 
convention  for  the  purpose  of  reviewing  the  condi- 
tion of  international  law,  and  of  agreeing  upon 
and  stating  in  authoritative  form  the  principles 
and  rules  thereof. 

Thereafter,  regular  conferences  for  that  purpose 
shall  be  called  and  held  at  stated  intervals. 

Third  Amendment.  Immediately  before  the  signature 
of  the  American  Delegates,  insert  the  following  reser- 
vation: 

Inasmuch  as  in  becoming  a member  of  the  League 
the  United  States  of  America  is  moved  by  no  in- 
terest or  wish  to  intrude  upon  or  interfere  with 
the  political  policy  or  internal  administration  of 
any  foreign  state,  and  by  no  existing  or  antici- 
pated dangers  in  the  affairs  of  the  American  conti- 
nents, but  accedes  to  the  wish  of  the  European 
states  that  it  shall  join  its  power  to  theirs  for  the 
preservation  of  general  peace,  the  representatives 
of  the  United  States  of  America  sign  this  conven- 
tion with  the  understanding  that  nothing  therein 
contained  shall  be  construed  to  imply  a relinquish- 
ment by  the  United  States  of  America  of  its  tra- 
ditional attitude  towards  purely  American  ques- 
tions, or  to  require  the  submission  of  its  policy 
regarding  such  questions  (including  therein  the 
admission  of  immigrants)  to  the  decision  or  rec- 
ommendation of  other  powers. 

Fourth  Amendment.  Add  to  Article  X the  following: 
After  the  expiration  of  five  years  from  the  begin- 
ning of  this  convention  any  party  may  terminate 
its  obligations  under  this  article  by  giving  one 
year’s  notice  in  writing  to  the  Secretary  General 
of  the  League. 

Fifth  Amendment.  Add  to  Article  IX  the  following: 
Such  commission  shall  have  full  power  of  inspec- 

[ 247  ] 


APPENDIX  D 

tion  and  verification  personally  and  by  authorized 
agents  as  to  all  armament,  equipment,  munitions 
and  industries  referred  to  in  Article  VIII. 

Sixth  Amendment.  Add  to  Article  XXIV  the  following: 
The  Executive  Council  shall  call  a general  confer- 
ence of  members  of  the  League  to  meet  not  less 
than  five  nor  more  than  ten  years  after  the  signing 
of  this  convention  for  the  revision  thereof,  and  at 
that  time,  or  any  time  thereafter  upon  one  year’s 
notice,  any  member  may  withdraw  from  the 
League. 

Polk,  Acting. 


[ 248  1 


E 


The  Assembly  on  Sept.  27,  1922,  expressed 
the  opinion  “the  obligation  to  render  assis- 
tance to  a country  attacked  shall  be  limited 
in  principle  to  those  countries  situated  in  the 
same  part  of  the  globe.”  This  confirms  abso- 
lutely Mr.  Wilson’s  sentences. 

When  this  book  went  to  press  the  Assembly 
of  the  League  had  before  it  the  report  of  its 
Disarmament  Commission.  Article  Eleven 
of  that  reads:  “No  high  contracting  parties 
shall  be  under  obligation  in  principle  to  co- 
operate in  a continent,  other  than  the  one 
in  which  they  are  situated,  in  military,  naval 
or  air  operation  undertaken  in  connection 
with  the  general  or  supplementary  assis- 
tance provided  for  by  this  Treaty.”  H.F. 


[ 249  [ 


F 


THE  COVENANT  OF  THE 
LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS 
THE  HIGH  CONTRACTING  PARTIES 

In  order  to  promote  international  cooperation 
and  to  achieve  international  peace  and  security 
by  the  acceptance  of  obligations  not  to  resort 
to  war, 

by  the  prescription  of  open,  just  and  honour- 
able relations  between  nations, 
by  the  firm  establishment  of  the  understand- 
ings of  international  law  as  the  actual  rule  of 
conduct  among  Governments,  and 
by  the  maintenance  of  justice  and  a scrupulous 
respect  for  all  treaty  obligations  in  the  dealings 
of  organized  peoples  with  one  another, 

Agree  to  this  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations. 

ARTICLE  i 

The  original  Members  of  the  League  of  Nations 
shall  be  those  of  the  Signatories  which  are  named 
in  the  Annex  to  this  Covenant  and  also  such  of 
those  other  States  named  in  the  Annex  as  shall 
accede  without  reservation  to  this  Covenant. 
Such  accession  shall  be  effected  by  a Declaration 
deposited  with  the  Secretariat  within  two  months 

[ 250  ] 


APPENDIX  F 


of  the  coming  into  force  of  the  Covenant.  Notice 
thereof  shall  be  sent  to  all  other  Members  of  the 
League. 

Any  fully  self-governing  State,  Dominion,  or 
Colony  not  named  in  the  Annex  may  become  a 
Member  of  the  League  if  its  admission  is  agreed 
to  by  two-thirds  of  the  Assembly,  provided  that 
it  shall  give  effective  guarantees  of  its  sincere  in- 
tention to  observe  its  international  obligations, 
and  shall  accept  such  regulations  as  may  be  pre- 
scribed by  the  League  in  regard  to  its  military, 
naval,  and  air  forces  and  armaments. 

Any  Member  of  the  League  may,  after  two 
years’  notice  of  its  intention  so  to  do,  withdraw 
from  the  League,  provided  that  all  its  interna- 
tional obligations  and  all  its  obligations  under 
this  Covenant  shall  have  been  fulfilled  at  the 
time  of  its  withdrawal. 

ARTICLE  1 

The  action  of  the  League  under  this  Covenant 
shall  be  effected  through  the  instrumentality  of 
an  Assembly  and  of  a Council,  with  a permanent 
Secretariat, 

article  3 

The  Assembly  shall  consist  of  Representatives  of 
the  Members  of  the  League. 

The  Assembly  shall  meet  at  stated  intervals 
and  from  time  to  time  as  occasion  may  require  at 
the  Seat  of  the  League  or  at  such  other  place  as 
may  be  decided  upon. 

[ 251  ] 


APPENDIX  F 


The  Assembly  may  deal  at  its  meetings  with 
any  matter  within  the  sphere  of  action  of  the 
League  or  affecting  the  peace  of  the  world. 

At  meetings  of  the  Assembly  each  Member  of 
the  League  shall  have  one  vote,  and  may  not 
have  more  than  three  Representatives. 

article  4 

The  Council  shall  consist  of  Representatives  of 
the  Principal  Allied  and  Associated  Powers,  to- 
gether with  Representatives  of  four  other  Mem- 
bers of  the  League.  These  four  Members  of  the 
League  shall  be  selected  by  the  Assembly  from 
time  to  time  in  its  discretion.  Until  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  Representatives  of  the  four  Members 
of  the  League  first  selected  by  the  Assembly, 
Representatives  of  Belgium,  Brazil,  Spain,  and 
Greece  shall  be  members  of  the  Council. 

With  the  approval  of  the  majority  of  the  As- 
sembly, the  Council  may  name  additional  Mem- 
bers of  the  League  whose  Representatives  shall 
always  be  members  of  the  Council;  the  Council 
with  like  approval  may  increase  the  number  of 
Members  of  the  League  to  be  selected  by  the  As- 
sembly for  representation  on  the  Council. 

The  Council  shall  meet  from  time  to  time  as 
occasion  may  require,  and  at  least  once  a year,  at 
the  Seat  of  the  League,  or  at  such  other  place  as 
may  be  decided  upon. 

The  Council  may  deal  at  its  meetings  with  any 


[ 252  ] 


APPENDIX  F 


matter  within  the  sphere  of  action  of  the  League 
or  affecting  the  peace  of  the  world. 

Any  Member  of  the  League  not  represented  on 
the  Council  shall  be  invited  to  send  a Represen- 
tative to  sit  as  a member  at  any  meeting  of  the 
Council  during  the  consideration  of  matters  spe- 
cially affecting  the  interests  of  that  Member  of 
the  League. 

At  meetings  of  the  Council,  each  Member  of 
the  League  represented  on  the  Council  shall  have 
one  vote,  and  may  have  not  more  than  one  Rep- 
resentative. 

article  5 

Except  where  otherwise  expressly  provided  in 
this  Covenant  or  by  the  terms  of  the  present 
Treaty,  decisions  at  any  meeting  of  the  Assembly 
or  of  the  Council  shall  require  the  agreement  of 
all  the  Members  of  the  League  represented  by  the 
meeting. 

All  matters  of  procedure  at  meetings  of  the  As- 
sembly or  of  the  Council,  including  the  appoint- 
ment of  Committees  to  investigate  particular 
matters,  shall  be  regulated  by  the  Assembly  or 
by  the  Council  and  may  be  decided  by  a majority 
of  the  Members  of  the  League  represented  at  the 
meeting. 

The  first  meeting  of  the  Assembly  and  the  first 
meeting  of  the  Council  shall  be  summoned  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States  of  America. 


[ 253  1 


APPENDIX  F 

ARTICLE  6 

The  permanent  Secretariat  shall  be  established 
at  the  Seat  of  the  League.  The  Secretariat  shall 
comprise  a Secretary  General  and  such  secre- 
taries and  staff  as  may  be  required. 

The  first  Secretary  General  shall  be  the  person 
named  in  the  Annex;  thereafter  the  Secretary 
General  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Council  with 
the  approved  of  the  majority  of  the  Assembly. 

The  secretaries  and  staff  of  the  Secretariat  shall 
be  appointed  by  the  Secretary  General  with  the 
approval  of  the  Council. 

The  Secretary  General  shall  act  in  that  capac- 
ity at  all  meetings  of  the  Assembly  and  of  the 
Council. 

The  expenses  of  the  Secretariat  shall  be  borne 
by  the  Members  of  the  League  in  accordance  with 
the  apportionment  of  the  expenses  of  the  Inter- 
national Bureau  of  the  Universal  Postal  Union. 
article  7 

The  Seat  of  the  League  is  established  at  Geneva. 

The  Council  may  at  any  time  decide  that  the 
Seat  of  the  League  shall  be  established  elsewhere. 

All  positions  under  or  in  connection  with  the 
League,  including  the  Secretariat,  shall  be  open 
equally  to  men  and  women. 

Representatives  of  the  Members  of  the  League 
and  officials  of  the  League  when  engaged  on  the 
business  of  the  League  shall  enjoy  diplomatic 
privileges  and  immunities. 

[ 254  ] 


APPENDIX  F 

The  buildings  and  other  property  occupied  by 
the  League  or  its  officials  or  by  Representatives 
attending  its  meetings  shall  be  inviolable. 

article  8 

The  Members  of  the  League  recognize  that  the 
maintenance  of  peace  requires  the  reduction  of 
national  armaments  to  the  lowest  point  consist- 
ent with  national  safety  and  the  enforcement  by 
common  action  of  international  obligations. 

The  Council,  taking  account  of  the  geographi- 
cal situation  and  circumstances  of  each  State, 
shall  formulate  plans  for  such  reduction  for  the 
consideration  and  action  of  the  several  Govern- 
ments. 

Such  plans  shall  be  subject  to  reconsideration 
and  revision  at  least  every  ten  years. 

After  these  plans  shall  have  been  adopted  by 
the  several  Governments,  the  limits  of  arma- 
ments therein  fixed  shall  not  be  exceeded  without 
the  concurrence  of  the  Council. 

The  Members  of  the  League  agree  that  the 
manufacture  by  private  enterprise  of  munitions 
and  implements  of  war  is  open  to  grave  objec- 
tions. The  Council  shall  advise  how  the  evil  ef- 
fects attendant  upon  such  manufacture  can  be 
prevented,  due  regard  being  had  to  the  necessi- 
ties of  those  Members  of  the  League  which  are 
not  able  to  manufacture  the  munitions  and  im- 
plements of  war  necessary  for  their  safety. 


[255  1 


APPENDIX  F 


The  Members  of  the  League  undertake  to  in- 
terchange full  and  frank  information  as  to  the 
scale  of  their  armaments,  their  military,  naval, 
and  air  programmes  and  the  condition  of  such  of 
their  industries  as  are  adaptable  to  war-like 
purposes. 

article  9 

A permanent  Commission  shall  be  constituted  to 
advise  the  Council  on  the  execution  of  the  provi- 
sions of  Articles  i and  8 and  on  military,  naval, 
and  air  questions  generally. 

ARTICLE  io 

The  Members  of  the  League  undertake  to  respect 
and  preserve  as  against  external  aggression  the 
territorial  integrity  and  existing  political  inde- 
pendence of  all  Members  of  the  League.  In  case 
of  any  such  aggression  or  in  case  of  any  threat  or 
danger  of  such  aggression  the  Council  shall  ad- 
vise upon  the  means  by  which  this  obligation 
shall  be  fulfilled. 

ARTICLE  II 

Any  war  or  threat  of  war,  whether  immediately 
affecting  any  of  the  Members  of  the  League  or 
not,  is  hereby  declared  a matter  of  concern  to  the 
whole  League,  and  the  League  shall  take  any  ac- 
tion that  may  be  deemed  wise  and  effectual  to 
safeguard  the  peace  of  nations.  In  case  any  such 
emergency  should  arise  the  Secretary  General 


[256] 


APPENDIX  F 


shall  on  the  request  of  any  Member  of  the  League 
forthwith  summon  a meeting  of  the  Council. 

It  is  also  declared  to  be  the  friendly  right  of 
each  Member  of  the  League  to  bring  to  the  atten- 
tion of  the  Assembly  or  of  the  Council  any  cir- 
cumstance whatever  affecting  international  rela- 
tions which  threatens  to  disturb  international 
peace  or  the  good  understanding  between  nations 
upon  which  peace  depends. 

ARTICLE  12 

The  Members  of  the  League  agree  that  if  there 
should  arise  between  them  any  dispute  likely  to 
lead  to  a rupture,  they  will  submit  the  matter 
either  to  arbitration  or  to  inquiry  by  the  Council, 
and  they  agree  in  no  case  to  resort  to  war  until 
three  months  after  the  award  by  the  arbitrators 
or  the  report  by  the  Council. 

In  any  case  under  this  Article  the  award  of  the 
arbitrators  shall  be  made  within  a reasonable 
time,  and  the  report  of  the  Council  shall  be  made 
within  six  months  after  the  submission  of  the 
dispute. 

article  13 

The  Members  of  the  League  agree  that  whenever 
any  dispute  shall  arise  between  them  which  they 
recognize  to  be  suitable  for  submission  to  arbitra- 
tion and  which  cannot  be  satisfactorily  settled  by 
diplomacy,  they  will  submit  the  whole  subject- 
matter  to  arbitration. 

[ 257  ] 


APPENDIX  F 


Disputes  as  to  the  interpretation  of  a treaty,  as 
to  any  question  of  international  law,  as  to  the 
existence  of  any  fact  which  if  established  would 
constitute  a breach  of  any  international  obliga- 
tion, or  as  to  the  extent  and  nature  of  the  repara- 
tion to  be  made  for  any  such  breach,  are  declared 
to  be  among  those  which  are  generally  suitable 
for  submission  to  arbitration. 

For  the  consideration  of  any  such  dispute  the 
court  of  arbitration  to  which  the  case  is  referred 
shall  be  the  Court  agreed  on  by  the  parties  to  the 
dispute  or  stipulated  in  any  convention  existing 
between  them. 

The  Members  of  the  League  agree  that  they 
will  carry  out  in  full  good  faith  any  award  that 
may  be  rendered,  and  that  they  will  not  resort  to 
war  against  a Member  of  the  League  which  com- 
plies therewith.  In  the  event  of  any  failure  to 
carry  out  such  an  award,  the  Council  shall  pro- 
pose what  steps  should  be  taken  to  give  effect 
thereto. 


article  14 

The  Council  shall  formulate  and  submit  to  the 
Members  of  the  League  for  adoption  plans  for 
the  establishment  of  a Permanent  Court  of  In- 
ternational Justice.  The  Court  shall  be  compe- 
tent to  hear  and  determine  any  dispute  of  an  in- 
ternational character  which  the  parties  thereto 
submit  to  it.  The  Court  may  also  give  an  advisory 


[ 258  ] 


APPENDIX  F 


opinion  upon  any  dispute  or  question  referred  to 
it  by  the  Council  or  by  the  Assembly. 

article  15 

If  there  should  arise  between  Members  of  the 
League  any  dispute  likely  to  lead  to  a rupture, 
which  is  not  submitted  to  arbitration  in  accord- 
ance with  Article  13,  the  Members  of  the  League 
agree  that  they  will  submit  the  matter  to  the 
Council.  Any  party  to  the  dispute  may  effect 
such  submission  by  giving  notice  of  the  existence 
of  the  dispute  to  the  Secretary  General,  who  will 
make  all  necessary  arrangements  for  a full  inves- 
tigation and  consideration  thereof. 

For  this  purpose  the  parties  to  the  dispute  will 
communicate  to  the  Secretary  General,  as 
promptly  as  possible,  statements  of  their  case 
with  all  the  relevant  facts  and  papers,  and  the 
Council  may  forthwith  direct  the  publication 
thereof. 

The  Council  shall  endeavor  to  effect  a settle- 
ment of  the  dispute,  and  if  such  efforts  are  suc- 
cessful, a statement  shall  be  made  public  giving 
such  facts  and  explanations  regarding  the  dispute 
and  the  terms  of  settlement  thereof  as  the  Coun- 
cil may  deem  appropriate. 

If  the  dispute  is  not  thus  settled,  the  Council 
either  unanimously  or  by  a majority  vote  shall 
make  and  publish  a report  containing  a state- 
ment of  the  facts  of  the  dispute  and  the  recom- 


[ 259  ] 


APPENDIX  F 

mendations  which  are  deemed  just  and  proper  in 
regard  thereto. 

Any  Member  of  the  League  represented  on  the 
Council  may  make  public  a statement  of  the  facts 
of  the  dispute  and  of  its  conclusions  regarding  the 
same. 

If  a report  by  the  Council  is  unanimously 
agreed  to  by  the  members  thereof  other  than  the 
Representatives  of  one  or  more  of  the  parties  to 
the  dispute,  the  Members  of  the  League  agree 
that  they  will  not  go  to  war  with  any  party  to  the 
dispute  which  complies  with  the  recommenda- 
tions of  the  report. 

If  the  Council  fails  to  reach  a report  which  is 
unanimously  agreed  to  by  the  members  thereof, 
other  than  the  Representatives  of  one  or  more  of 
the  parties  to  the  dispute,  the  Members  of  the 
League  reserve  to  themselves  the  right  to  take 
such  action  as  they  shall  consider  necessary  for 
the  maintenance  of  right  and  justice. 

If  the  dispute  between  the  parties  is  claimed 
by  one  of  them,  and  is  found  by  the  Council,  to 
arise  out  of  a matter  which  by  international  law 
is  solely  within  the  domestic  jurisdiction  of  that 
party,  the  Council  shall  so  report,  and  shall  make 
no  recommendation  as  to  its  settlement. 

The  Council  may  in  any  case  under  this  Article 
refer  the  dispute  to  the  Assembly.  The  dispute 
shall  be  so  referred  at  the  request  of  either  party 
to  the  dispute,  provided  that  such  request  be 

[ 260  ] 


APPENDIX  F 


made  within  fourteen  days  after  the  submission 
of  the  dispute  to  the  Council. 

In  any  case  referred  to  the  Assembly,  all  the 
provisions  of  this  Article  and  of  Article  12  relat- 
ing to  the  action  and  powers  of  the  Council  shall 
apply  to  the  action  and  powers  of  the  Assembly, 
provided  that  a report  made  by  the  Assembly,  if 
concurred  in  by  the  Representatives  of  those 
Members  of  the  League  represented  on  the  Coun- 
cil and  of  a majority  of  the  other  Members  of  the 
League,  exclusive  in  each  case  of  the  Representa- 
tives of  the  parties  to  the  dispute,  shall  have  the 
same  force  as  a report  by  the  Council  concurred 
in  by  all  the  members  thereof  other  than  the 
Representatives  of  one  or  more  of  the  parties  to 
the  dispute. 

article  1 6 

Should  any  Member  of  the  League  resort  to  war 
in  disregard  of  its  covenants  under  Articles  12, 
13,  or  15,  it  shall  ipso  facto  be  deemed  to  have 
committed  an  act  of  war  against  all  other  Mem- 
bers of  the  League,  which  hereby  undertake  im- 
mediately to  subject  it  to  the  severance  of  all 
trade  or  financial  relations,  the  prohibition  of  all 
intercourse  between  their  nationals  and  the  na- 
tionals of  the  covenant-breaking  State,  and  the 
prevention  of  all  financial,  commercial,  or  per- 
sonal intercourse  between  the  nationals  of  the 
covenant-breaking  State  and  the  nationals  of  any 


[261  ] 


APPENDIX  F 

other  State,  whether  a Member  of  the  League 
or  not. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Council  in  such  case 
to  recommend  to  the  several  Governments  con- 
cerned what  effective  military,  naval,  or  air  force 
the  Members  of  the  League  shall  severally  con- 
tribute to  the  armed  forces  to  be  used  to  protect 
the  covenants  of  the  League. 

The  Members  of  the  League  agree,  further, 
that  they  will  mutually  support  one  another  in 
the  financial  and  economic  measures  which  are 
taken  under  this  Article,  in  order  to  minimize  the 
loss  and  inconvenience  resulting  from  the  above 
measures,  and  that  they  will  mutually  support 
one  another  in  resisting  any  special  measures 
aimed  at  one  of  their  number  by  the  covenant, 
breaking  State,  and  that  they  will  take  the  neces- 
sary steps  to  afford  passage  through  their  terri- 
tory to  the  forces  of  any  of  the  Members  of  the 
League  which  are  cooperating  to  protect  the  cov- 
enants of  the  League. 

Any  Member  of  the  League  which  has  violated 
any  covenant  of  the  League  may  be  declared  to 
be  no  longer  a Member  of  the  League  by  a vote  of 
the  Council  concurred  in  by  the  Representatives 
of  all  the  other  Members  of  the  League  repre- 
sented thereon. 

article  17 

In  the  event  of  a dispute  between  a Member  of 
the  League  and  a State  which  is  not  a Member  of 
[ 262  ] 


APPENDIX  F 


the  League,  or  between  States  not  Members  of 
the  League,  the  State  or  States,  not  Members  of 
the  League  shall  be  invited  to  accept  the  obliga- 
tions of  membership  in  the  League  for  the  pur- 
poses of  such  dispute,  upon  such  conditions  as 
the  Council  may  deem  just.  If  such  invitation  is 
accepted,  the  provisions  of  Articles  1 2 to  1 6 in- 
clusive shall  be  applied  with  such  modifications 
as  may  be  deemed  necessary  by  the  Council. 

Upon  such  invitation  being  given  the  Council 
shall  immediately  institute  an  inquiry  into  the 
circumstances  of  the  dispute  and  recommend 
such  action  as  may  seem  best  and  most  effectual 
in  the  circumstances. 

If  a State  so  invited  shall  refuse  to  accept  the 
obligations  of  membership  in  the  League  for  the 
purposes  of  such  dispute,  and  shall  resort  to  war 
against  a Member  of  the  League,  the  provisions 
of  Article  16  shall  be  applicable  as  against  the 
State  taking  such  action. 

If  both  parties  to  the  dispute  when  so  invited 
refuse  to  accept  the  obligations  of  membership  in 
the  League  for  the  purpose  of  such  dispute,  the 
Council  may  take  such  measures  and  make  such 
recommendations  as  will  prevent  hostilities  and 
will  result  in  the  settlement  of  the  dispute. 

article  1 8 

Every  treaty  or  international  engagement  en- 
tered into  hereafter  by  any  Member  of  the  League 


[263] 


APPENDIX  F 


shall  be  forthwith  registered  with  the  Secretariat 
and  shall  as  soon  as  possible  be  published  by  it. 
No  such  treaty  or  international  engagement  shall 
be  binding  until  so  registered. 

article  19 

The  Assembly  may  from  time  to  time  advise  the 
reconsideration  by  Members  of  the  League  of 
treaties  which  have  become  inapplicable  and  the 
consideration  of  international  conditions  whose 
continuance  might  endanger  the  peace  of  the 
world. 

article  20 

The  Members  of  the  League  severally  agree  that 
this  Covenant  is  accepted  as  abrogating  all  obli- 
gations or  understandings  inter  se  which  are  in- 
consistent with  the  terms  thereof,  and  solemnly 
undertake  that  they  will  not  hereafter  enter  into 
any  engagements  inconsistent  with  the  terms 
thereof. 

In  case  any  Member  of  the  League  shall,  be- 
fore becoming  a Member  of  the  League,  have  un- 
dertaken any  obligations  inconsistent  with  the 
terms  of  this  Covenant,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
such  Member  to  take  immediate  steps  to  procure 
its  release  from  such  obligations. 

article  21 

Nothing  in  this  Covenant  shall  be  deemed  to 
affect  the  validity  of  international  engagements, 


[264] 


APPENDIX  F 


such  as  treaties  of  arbitration  or  regional  under- 
standings like  the  Monroe  doctrine,  for  securing 
the  maintenance  of  peace. 

ARTICLE  11 

To  those  colonies  and  territories  which  as  a con- 
sequence of  the  late  war  have  ceased  to  be  under 
the  sovereignty  of  the  States  which  formerly  gov- 
erned them  and  which  are  inhabited  by  peoples 
not  yet  able  to  stand  by  themselves  under  the 
strenuous  conditions  of  the  modern  world,  there 
should  be  applied  the  principle  that  the  well- 
being and  development  of  such  peoples  form  a 
sacred  trust  of  civilization  and  that  securities  for 
the  performance  of  this  trust  should  be  embodied 
in  this  Covenant. 

The  best  method  of  giving  practical  effect  to 
this  principle  is  that  the  tutelage  of  such  peoples 
should  be  entrusted  to  advanced  nations  who  by 
reason  of  their  resources,  their  experience  or  their 
geographical  position  can  best  undertake  this  re- 
sponsibility, and  who  are  willing  to  accept  it,  and 
that  this  tutelage  should  be  exercised  by  them  as 
Mandatories  on  behalf  of  the  League. 

The  character  of  the  mandate  must  differ  ac- 
cording to  the  stage  of  the  development  of  the 
people,  the  geographical  situation  of  the  terri- 
tory, its  economic  conditions,  and  other  similar 
circumstances. 

Certain  communities  formerly  belonging  to  the 
[265] 


APPENDIX  F 


Turkish  Empire  have  reached  a stage  of  develop- 
ment where  their  existence  as  independent  na- 
ions  can  be  provisionally  recognized  subject  to 
the  rendering  of  administrative  advice  and  as- 
sistance by  a Mandatory  until  such  time  as  they 
are  able  to  stand  alone.  The  wishes  of  these  com- 
munities must  be  a principal  consideration  in  the 
selection  of  the  Mandatory. 

Other  peoples,  especially  those  of  Central  Af- 
rica, are  at  such  a stage  that  the  Mandatory 
must  be  responsible  for  the  administration  of  the 
territory  under  conditions  which  will  guarantee 
freedom  of  conscience  and  religion,  subject  only 
to  the  maintenance  of  public  order  and  morals, 
the  prohibition  of  abuses  such  as  the  slave  trade, 
the  arms  traffic,  and  the  liquor  traffic,  and  the 
prevention  of  the  establishment  of  fortifications 
or  military  and  naval  bases  and  of  military  train- 
ing of  the  natives  for  other  than  police  purposes 
and  the  defence  of  territory,  and  will  also  secure 
equal  opportunities  for  the  trade  and  commerce 
of  other  Members  of  the  League. 

There  are  territories,  such  as  South-West  Af- 
rica and  certain  of  the  South  Pacific  Islands, 
which,  owing  to  the  sparseness  of  their  popula- 
tion, or  their  small  size,  or  their  remoteness  from 
the  centers  of  civilization,  or  their  geographical 
contiguity  to  the  territory  of  the  Mandatory,  and 
other  circumstances,  can  be  best  administered 
under  the  laws  of  the  Mandatory  as  integral  por- 

[ 266  ] 


APPENDIX  F 

tions  of  its  territory,  subject  to  the  safeguards 
above  mentioned  in  the  interests  of  the  indige- 
nous population. 

In  every  case  of  mandate,  the  Mandatory  shall 
render  to  the  Council  an  annual  report  in  refer- 
ence to  the  territory  committed  to  its  charge. 

The  degree  of  authority,  control,  or  adminis- 
tration to  be  exercised  by  the  Mandatory  shall, 
if  not  previously  agreed  upon  by  the  Members  of 
the  League,  be  explicitly  defined  in  each  case  by 
the  Council. 

A permanent  Commission  shall  be  constituted 
to  receive  and  examine  the  annual  reports  of  the 
Mandatories  and  to  advise  the  Council  on  all 
matters  relating  to  the  observance  of  the  man- 
dates. 

article  23 

Subject  to  and  in  accordance  with  the  provisions 
of  international  conventions  existing  or  hereafter 
to  be  agreed  upon,  the  Members  of  the  League: 

(a)  will  endeavour  to  secure  and  maintain  fair 
and  humane  conditions  of  labor  for  men, 
women,  and  children,  both  in  their  own 
countries  and  in  all  countries  to  which  their 
commercial  and  industrial  relations  extend, 
and  for  that  purpose  will  establish  and  main- 
tain the  necessary  international  organiza- 
tions; 

(1 h ) undertake  to  secure  just  treatment  of  the 

[267] 


APPENDIX  F 


native  inhabitants  of  territories  under  their 
control; 

(c)  will  entrust  the  League  with  the  general 
supervision  over  the  execution  of  agreements 
with  regard  to  the  traffic  in  women  and  chil- 
dren, and  the  traffic  in  opium  and  other  dan- 
gerous drugs; 

(i d ) will  entrust  the  League  with  the  general 
supervision  of  the  trade  in  arms  and  ammu- 
nition with  the  countries  in  which  the  con- 
trol of  this  traffic  is  necessary  in  the  common 
interest; 

(e)  will  make  provision  to  secure  and  maintain 
freedom  of  communications  and  of  transit 
and  equitable  treatment  for  the  commerce  of 
all  Members  of  the  League.  In  this  connec- 
tion, the  special  necessities  of  the  regions 
devastated  during  the  war  of  1514-1918 
shall  be  borne  in  mind; 

(f)  will  endeavor  to  take  steps  in  matters  of  in- 
ternational concern  for  the  prevention  and 
control  of  disease. 

article  24 

There  shall  be  placed  under  the  direction  of  the 
League  all  international  bureaux  already  estab- 
lished by  general  treaties  if  the  parties  to  such 
treaties  consent.  All  such  international  bureaux 
and  all  commissions  for  the  regulation  of  matters 
of  international  interest  hereafter  constituted 
shall  be  placed  under  the  direction  of  the  League. 
[ 268  ] 


APPENDIX  F 

In  all  matters  of  international  interest  which 
are  regulated  by  general  conventions  but  which 
are  not  placed  under  the  control  of  international 
bureaux  or  commissions,  the  Secretariat  of  the 
League  shall,  subject  to  the  consent  of  the  Coun- 
cil and  if  desired  by  the  parties,  collect  and  dis- 
tribute all  relevant  information  and  shall  render 
any  other  assistance  which  may  be  necessary  or 
desirable. 

The  Council  may  include  as  part  of  the  ex- 
penses of  the  Secretariat  the  expenses  of  any  bu- 
reau or  commission  which  is  placed  under  the  di- 
rection of  the  League. 

article  25 

The  Members  of  the  League  agree  to  encourage 
and  promote  the  establishment  and  cooperation 
of  duly  authorized  voluntary  national  Red  Cross 
organizations  having  as  purposes  the  improve- 
ment of  health,  the  prevention  of  disease,  and  the 
mitigation  of  suffering  throughout  the  world. 
article  26 

Amendments  to  this  Covenant  will  take  effect 
when  ratified  by  the  Members  of  the  League 
whose  representatives  compose  the  Council  and 
by  a majority  of  the  Members  of  the  League 
whose  Representatives  compose  the  Assembly. 

No  such  amendment  shall  bind  any  Member  of 
the  League  which  signifies  its  dissent  therefrom, 
but  in  that  case  it  shall  cease  to  be  a Member  of 
the  League. 


[269] 


APPENDIX  F 


ANNEX 

i.  ORIGINAL  MEMBERS  OF  THE  LEAGUE  OF 
NATIONS  SIGNATORIES  OF  THE 
TREATY  OF  PEACE 


United  States  of 
America 
Belgium 
Bolivia 
Brazil 

British  Empire 

CANADA 
AUSTRALIA 
SOUTH  AFRICA 
NEW  ZEALAND 
INDIA 

China 

Cuba 

Ecuador 

France 

Greece 

Guatemala 


Haiti 

Hedjaz 

Honduras 

Italy 

Japan 

Liberia 

Nicaragua 

Panama 

Peru 

Poland 

Portugal 

Roumania 

Serb-Croat-Slovene 

State 

Siam 

Czecho-Slovakia 

Uruguay 


STATES  INVITED  TO  ACCEDE  TO  THE 
COVENANT 


Argentine  Republic 

Chili 

Colombia 

Denmark 

Netherlands 

Norway 

Paraguay 


Persia 

Salvador 

Spain 

Sweden 

Switzerland 

Venezuela 


\ 


